I think that is near to the point I was much less eloquently
trying to make. I think what I was more concerned with, though,
was not how we productively recoup initial positions or
investments, but how certain forms of classroom discourse--i.e.,
"debating" issues with students--can lead us to unintentionally
and unproductively recoup those roles of "the one who leads" and
"the one who knows."
>
> Another strategy is to change material practices. My
perception is
> that most of the debate around whether we should be pissing
with or
> against our students, or whether we should be worried about
using that
> metaphor or not, could only take place around the practice of
solitary
> essay writing -- a practice which structures-in features of
domination
> and submission which can ultimately only be finessed, nuanced,
or
> endlessly interrogated. If people write collectively,
collaboratively,
> or conversationally, many of these points become moot.
I agree, but these issues aren't limited to only the writing
practice. In my class, I put so much emphasis on collaborative
construction of evalution criteria and peer review workshops,
that I've taken myself out of the revising loop a lot more. This
doesn't happen as much in whole class discussions--the students
still turn to me as "discussion leader" and I probably accept
that role too readily. The synchronous on-line group discussions
they participate in have a very different dynamic, though. I
think the combination of the two (synchronous on-line group
discussions and face-to-face whole-class discussions) complement
each other well. Still, in the face-to-face discussions I'm aware
that the discussion is often more teacher-centered than I like,
and that when the class discussion turns into a debate with a
student who's challenging me then it becomes unreasonably and
unproductively teacher-centred.
See my previous post in this thread for one of my solutions that
short-circuits that potential teacher-centered kind of debate.
I want to be clear, too, that I'm not saying our students
shouldn't challenge us. I am saying that when our students
challenge us we need to be aware that this is a situation where
we can easily slip into an unproductive debate that results in
shifting the focus away from the students and onto us, the
teachers, in a way that distances the students from the discourse
(because of our authority) instead of bringing them into it
(because of their authority).
>
> My vote is with changing material practices, although I'm
willing to
> interrogate that vote :)
>
> Bob King
>
-- Greg Ritter gritter@felix.vcu.edu ritter@urvax.urich.edu http://www.urich.edu/~ritter