In class we spent a good deal of time discussing rhetoric in research and reasoning behind the essential lack of primary sources. After coupling the Enos article with the Moss article, I have more than realized that our students (and ourselves as students) are relying on computers and their "magic" too much. And I truthfully believe computers are magic -- I have NO idea how they work, all I know is they are amazing.
Corbett is convinced that composition teachers are "much more sophisticated that teachers of composition were even fifteen years ago" (45). The term "sophisticated" makes me wonder -- what is sophistication exactly? Intellectually appealing is one definition, but I highly doubt we are being judged on how intellectually appealing we are. The most likely definition he is refering to is to be ahead in development. But, he continues to examine how far we've come in sophistication...whatever that is.
He touches on computers and their lack of logic and inability to utilize topoi. By spending time analyzing this sophistication that we have as composition teachers and allowing more of our time to be used teaching and acting on different topoi through logical formats, we can turn the talk of rhetoric into action. Take away the computer for an assginment -- see what happens. It's kind of fun!
In this article he also makes the observation that computers cannot analyze the written letter B and recognize that it is a part of the alphabet. This is out of date.
So, in order to better teach our students, they need to analyze more primary sources and find a place to rhetorize, or, as Dr. Eskew and Kenneth Burke would say, find a place to "put in their oar."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I came to your blog to write on your other post (since you were expecting a comment), then I decided I may as well write on this one too! I understand where you are coming from about computers being magical and sort-of detrimental at the same time, but these days can't they also be the key to accessing the primary sources you are thinging of? It seems like everything has been transfered to some sort of computer-abled format. Or, are you actually talking about going to the library and checking out some real books. I feel like I am the only person who actually does that (yea I'm young but that was what I was taught to do and I am actually really confused with JSTOR, though I can Google pretty well). Hm, maybe you should take your students to the library (Does Los Amos have a libary? hahaha) as a field trip and force them to live in a time without Google, it could be an English and history lesson all wrapped up in one.
ReplyDeleteIt blows my mind that only 15 years ago, the internet was nothing more than some dinky program that computer nerds locked in a bunker in Geneva used to communicate. It also astonishes me that only 10 years ago, the coolest thing people could do on the internet is talk in a chat room to people all the way on the other side of the world. But in a few short years, look how far we've come! Our entire lives are computer based now. We network, socialize, and entertain ourselves on the internet. We can play video games and download music and movies. We have an abundance of resources right at out fingertips. It is all very surreal to me, but at the same time miraculous.
ReplyDeleteBut it can't replace good old-fashioned know how. When I was a kid in middle and high school, we were forbidden to use calculators, especially those graphing ones (which were so cool when they came out but have since become dated). Our math teachers weren't opposed to them, per se, but they did want us to learn how to solve the problems on our own first. It was a real pain in my neck back then, but in retrospect, I understand why they made our lives more difficult. They didn't want us to hand over our reason to a simple tool.
I think computer learning should be the same way. Computers, as miraculous as they are, are just tools to make our lives easier. Students need to learn how to solve the problems for themselves by going to a library, talking to people, etc. Make them work for the answers to their problems. At the end of the day, computers are just glorified calculators. Do we really want them thinking for us?
Hell no we don't want them thinking for us! As the Corbett article said, they can't think logically. There is too much black and white in a computer's world as opposed to a human's.
ReplyDeleteI Robot anyone?
I agree with your notion of "taking away the computer" for a moment. Although this whole university vibe is so cognitive and centered on intangible ideas, students are getting even MORE hands off with computers: physical materials(despite Dr. Souder's and Jean-Luc's crusade) are slowly going the way of the dinosaur. I guess you could analyze it as a sort of meta-thing: computers represent the ethereality of the ideas you are learning. But maybe there is an unconscious thing happening where students find these ideas that are only found on the internet less accessible because they CAN'T be held in print. The adverse can certainly be true as well, however: ideas are MORE accessible because they are widely available.
ReplyDelete