Bernhardt IWA

Since I was on Apparatus Group One, I helped write the summary and "Framing the Reading" for this assignment and am using that same information for this assignment as well:

When we sit down and think about what makes a text visually appealing, do we think of the smooth left margin with the occasional indentation, the way the lines are perfectly spaced down the page, or whether the font is serif or sans serif? Probably not. But we may forget that texts can be more than words. They can be advertisements, data sheets, technical reports, résumés, web pages, or letters home. They can include graphics, tables, and charts and changes in font and text size. Now think for a minute about the beginnings of written communication. Did ancient Egyptians develop a phonetic alphabet before they began chiseling history on walls? Were the first recordings of life on cave walls done with words?

Images worked then in a similar way to how they work now, as effective visual communication, especially to a writing illiterate population. As we moved forward over the centuries, still most of the population was writing illiterate and communication was either verbal or through images. Not until the advent of the printing press was there a way to distribute written information to the masses. Today, we use a mixture of written, verbal, and visual communications, sometimes all at once.

In “Seeing the Text,” Bernhardt looks at the way written and visual communications can work together, and he tries to open our eyes so that we can truly see how visuals and text augment each other.

The questions I will have my students complete are:

●      Look at (but don’t read) a piece of writing printed in a newspaper, magazine, news website, or blog. Take notes about the visual aspect of how the writing is presented. Do any images accompany the article? Do you see any charts or tables? Are there any headings or lists?

I am reading an advertisement that promotes healthy body images by Dove. The text is written in the pattern of  a woman's body, following an hourglass figure. My eyes are automatically lured to the figure and shape. It shows how the hourglass has changed over time as to what is expected of a woman's body shape and the white space in between the waist line. It is significantly smaller now compared to what it was 50 years ago. The writing is presented as the years and time. The chart and heading promote "bringing back space and freedom."

 QD 1:

  Bernhardt characterizes the typical classroom essay as consisting of “full, declarative sentences, arranged in paragraphs with low visual identity” (36). Do you struggle with generating or reading this conventional, low-visual type of writing? Why or why not?

I do struggle with reading long pieces that have typical indention and small print. It feels much more dense and dreadful than something with visual explanation or varied chunks of points with outright headings. I enjoy reading, I just also enjoy visual stimulant and variation in text. 

AE 2:

Take a word document that you have created for this class. Change the font to a font you have never heard of or are not familiar with. How does it change the way you understand or interpret the text?

I have chosen to take a Teaching Journal assignment and change the font to Helvetica. It makes the document much more personal and journal-like and even intimate, as if it is part of the lost art of handwritten letters. It created  newness and an explorative aspect.

After You Read:

How would Scott McCloud have represented Bernhardt’s argument?

I think Scott McCloud would have incorporated visual examples of his argument, such as varying texts and pictures and maybe even had a narrator following the text in comic form.

MM:

 Bernhardt writes, “By studying actual texts as they function in particular contexts, we can gain an improved understanding of what constitute appropriate, effective strategies of rhetorical organization” (44). In what particular contexts do you consider visually thinking about text to be most appropriate? Of all the formal writing assignments in this course, which one calls for the most visual thinking about presentation of text?

I think that visual representations should exist for all texts, whether it be n form of outlines in the beginning or interesting framing devices with subheadings that incorporate thoughts. I think our multi-media essay will promote the most visualization.

Teaching Journal 9/10-9/14

            Week three of teaching has for me solidified why I have chosen this as a career. I had three students approach me after class Monday (after teaching McCloud and Berger) to tell me that they really enjoy being able to question our what we believe to be true and how we are persuaded through text, media, etc. These three particular are students that I have been wondering about in class. They have limited participation n discussion and do their homework but without any excitement about the subject matter. But I watched their eyes brighten on Monday and I knew that I had reached them and connected and it was an amazing moment for me as a teacher. I think we were all waiting for "that" moment.
           I enjoyed teaching McCloud and Berger a lot on Monday, I also enjoyed teaching Allen, but my students also really enjoyed Lammott, King and Diaz. They shared that they were refreshed to know that everyone struggles in writing, not just them. Debunking the "inspired writer" might have been the best thing so far for my class. Peter Elbow proved to be the hardest to help them understand. They grasped the idea of contraries and not everything has to be either/or but can be both/and. Howeer, they were confused when talking about voice. I had to bring Lammott, King, and Diaz back for reference of voice.
           I'm interested to see how they connect to Porter this coming Monday. I have prepared a Power Point  to show them how things influence other things and then a voting system to measure Porter and intertextuality with.  I think they'll enjoy it, but we'll have to wait and see.

Howard Dialectical Notebook

There’s no solution to stopping plagiarism. It seems that we are in prevention and consequence mode.	Yet the more I study student plagiarism, the more I identify problems not susceptible to pedagogical solution (219).
Does it? I think that intentional plagiarism if an issue out of the classroom, however, accidental is definitely something for us to deal with.	Whether it is in teaching moral codes or citation rules, an assumption that runs throughout the discourse of plagiarism is that the “solution” to it lies in the classroom (220).
The causes are not pedagogy and the prevention is not pedagogy.	I wish to explore a contrary perspective: that the causes of plagiarism exceed pedagogy (220).
Ouch. Agreeable, but still, there is a separation in this statement that I’m not sure is projected well.  Yes, we are in different systems but do we want it to be apparent and intimidating? I prefer it not to be.	Pedagogy can’t fix plagiarism, because students and faculty are too much working from different economic systems (220).
How do the students get to complete it without taking the invitation? Is this something to be evaluated in the class expectations?	These instructors design their classes to invite students into that intellectual enterprise, and they are annoyed by those who complete the course without ever accepting the invitation (221).
They have to want to write it. Throw in Murray’s autobiographical text conversation and encourage tem to make it their own.	“Many students write poorly and with deplorable styles simply because they do not care; their failures are less the result of incapacity than the lack of will” (224).
Geez.  I don’t believe the statement, let alone want to answer it.	And why, in fact, should we care about students who are so much our intellectual inferiors? (225).
This is true. Is he from Portsmouth? (haha)  They do come to college to flee the lower end and, in some cases, for a means of income. We can only encourage those students to understand their motivation and want to be a leader to change it for others.	Keith Rhodes, for example, asserts that students come to college today not to become leaders but to “flee the drying lower end of our national economy” (226).
That’s why the subjects need to be interesting to them. The combination of the economic system difference between student and teacher allows for a gap of miscommunication of what each student truly wants to write about and is interested in. Everyone has done something because they had to, as quickly as possible, and I guarantee it’s because they weren’t interested. Make it interesting.	A student’s purpose, as she begins to compose an assigned college text, may not be original thought; it may be the completion of the task at hand by the most expeditious means possible (228).
It is about degrees for economic gain but this is where counseling for picking the right degree comes in.	Students may, in short, see college writing assignments as a means of acquiring the institutionalized variety of cultural capital of academic degrees (228).

Porter IWA

"Intertexuality and the Discourse Community"

Before Your Read:

I get help from peers in workshops and in class. Sometimes I go to a Writing Center when I feel that there is an organizational issue in my paper or short story and I've stared at it too long and just can't see what's wrong. Sometimes I will read things aloud and often times the problem lies in order of processing so when you read it aloud it will stick at the point of the problem.

I get ideas from people-watching. Flannery O'Connor said that everyone days at least one absurd thing a day, whether it's absurd for them or the rest of the world.  I watch for the absurdities. I also word jumble. Often times putting two words that have no connection together leads to an amazing connection. For formal papers, I pick subjects that I have strong reactions to. Either way, good or bad, or for Peter Elbow--maybe both.

Summary:

Porter focuses on the idea of thoughts and ideas being borrowed and shared between texts in the term "intertexuality".  The problem, ofcourse, arising in what is original and creative when built upon other things? The summation of the conclusion becomes the distinct differences between collaborative notions becoming one's individual creative work and definitions of plagiarism in the discourse community. The link that I believe my students will be making is between Porter's idea of intertexuality and Allen's argument of collusion. Which influence on one's work is acceptable? Does it really come down to the physical aspect of peers writing or correcting work? I don't believe that it does, for many different reasons, however, it will be hard for my students to understand building ideas and having ownership. I think the best way to begin that conversation will be discussing giving credit where it is due.

QD
4:  I imagined the argument of acceptability would be based on the discussion the paper enters into. For instance, if the student writes a paper for a class based on an assignment, the acceptability is based on whether it meets the requirement and the goal of the paper. However, Porter evaluates the work based on other's surrounding that student and whether it meets their approval. This is an odd notion, if I'm understanding it correctly, because what if someone in the reading community questions the originality of the writer, or the goal of the assignment, it doesn't mean that the paper doesn't exist because of non- approval, it simply means further evaluation is needed. When I think about how my own writing has been workshopped, I understand that this is the way writing works in a reading community, however, whether or not the group approves of my fiction piece does not mean I will not continue writing it.


5. I believe that Porter does have a strong argument that individuality is greatly affected by intertextuality and that creative voice is sometimes hard to find. I'm sure Porter is neither the first to write about this, nor going to be the last. This is the intertextuality in process with his writing and then again with me writing about his writing. I think the key to demonstrate to our students is that rhetoric is a ladder that we all build upon with ideas but to give credit to the previous stair. This is the determination between originality and plagiarism.

AE
2.  For this course you will be asked to build upon others' ideas to continue a conversation in writing discourse. While many of you will need help learning how to incorporate another's thoughts with your own, note that I will accept drafts that need help and work as a learning opportunity. However, take excellent class notes when we discuss how to cite and avoid claiming another's work as your own.  Accidents happen but when you have been taught the difference it becomes intentional. Intentional plagiarism and theft of another's works and thoughts will result in failure of the course and possible judiciary proceedings.

MM

Porter hasn't really changed my ideas of writers working alone. I still know that writers work physically alone while writing but have ideas from other things in their minds during incubation. I can see how the idea of it being somewhat a group process, but I still see writing as an act done alone.

Lamott, King, and Diaz Dialectical Notebook

Lamott--
This reminds me of Allen's debunking of the "inspired writer."	I know some very great writers, writers you love who write beautifully and have made a great deal of money, and not one of them sits down routinely feeling wildly enthusiastic and confident (301).
A good lesson for resilience.	Very few writers really know what they are doing until they've done it (301).
Hemingway said this, too!	Almost all good writing begins with terrible first drafts. You need to start somewhere (303).
King-- This reminds of Murray's inability to write in a different environment.	I'm in another place, a basement place where there are lots of bright lights and clear images. This is a place I've built for myself over the years (305).
Everyone feels it. You just have to write something. The something of nothing is often good stuff.	You can approach the act of writing with nervousness, excitement, hopefulness, or even despair--the sense that you can never completely put on the page of what's in your mind and heart (307).
Everyone approaches it differently and King asks us to bring voice and identity.	I'm not asking you to come reverently or unquestioningly; I'm not asking you to be politically correct or cast aside your sense of humor (please God you have one) (307).
Diaz-- Again, debunking the "inspired writer."	It wasn't that I couldn't write. I wrote every day. I actually worked really hard at writing (319).
I wouldn't call a novel relatively easy. Others wouldn't either.	Five years of my life and the dream I had of myself, all down the tubes because I couldn't pull off something other people seemed to pull off with relative ease: a novel (320).
Good last bit of advice to keep working at what you love.	In my view a writer is a writer because even when there is no hope, even when nothing you do shows any sign of promise, you keep writing anyway (320).

Bartholomae IWA

"Must We Mean What We Say?"

Pre-Reading:
My favorite novel is Their Eyes Were Watching God by Zora Neale Hurston. The author speaks in the beginning but there is a voice change throughout between author and main character Janie, which is brilliant for reader connection. I think it works very well.

Summary:
Barholomae, a freshman English instructor, gives us examples and summaries of use of voice and identity through papers he's graded and students he's taught over the years. His observation is that students write disconnected essays when they are not allowed to insert personal voice and identity claim to the subject matter. He does not feel that that allowing students to use such voice is wrong, nor does he believe allowing them to change voice in the paper is wrong, either. I connect this idea to McCloud's switch in voice the moment he introduces the real picture of himself. It does not change the voice of the comic for us, but it further reinforces his argument.

QD:

I believe that the title of this article, "Must We Mean What We Say," goes back to Bartholomae's claim that student write disingenuine and disconnected papers.  Must students mean what they write? Should they have connection to the subject matter and have identity in their claims? Or should they write it to turn it in and get a grade? There is much argument in just his title, alone.

AE:

Hoagland uses both devices to one, step back and introduce us as separate from the ungrateful teen, but then moves us into connection with a personal identity and character closer to the reader, the speaker. Then, as readers, we are invited to compare our own lives and understanding, and it becomes an active participating conversation between writer and reader.

MM:

I think that my contribution with identity play works well with fiction. there is a piece of my identity in everyone of my characters, and often times, it's resonance. However, We change how much we want to give a way in each character so we step back to caricature to allow audience a connection. Fiction writing is really a great analogy for Barthalomae's arguments.

Elbow IWA

"Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries"

Pre-Reading:

If I were allow to use first person in my papers, I would absolutely use it often. As a creative writer, we are told to write about what we know. Writing about what I know would give me a way to write a paper about something I didn't know so much about, but personalize it with my own voice. This makes me think about Murray's autobiographical text. Anything can be made ours if we are allowed to add ourselves to it.

Summary:

Elbow tackles the concept of voice in papers; a construct that hasn't been really talked about since the '60s. He goes about explaining voice with binaries of the previous argument, voice tone and presence being either/or but concludes that his binary argument for voice and first person is and/both. Because he makes the argument that not only does voice help establish authority and account, but it benefits the writer and reader (52). While there are occasions when it's helpful to not have an overwhelming voice in a paper, more times than not, voice grabs the attention of the reader/student and helps them connect. This thought relates back to McCloud and his argument for a "visual voice" as a comic version of himself in order to gain and keep student attention.


QD:
What sticks out most to me about Elbow's conversation about his own writing is that he argues all papers have voice, we just think of voice meaning narrative (54). In his own writing he establishes voice, sometimes with first person use of I and sometimes not. It depends on the circumstance.  I do believe he established voice in this text well, though.

AE:
Sincerity is voice that captures truth and uncontrived emotion, but relies on real connection to human emotion. Resonance is layering and adding details into a story or piece with undertones of their unconsciousness, with a rich meaning the reader may not even get.

Connecting to the Reading:
I don't believe Allen was fighting against voice altogether. I think she was fighting against a contrived voice believed to not be a struggle to obtain. Everyone has voice, we just need to use it appropriately.

MM:
I do believe that Elbow's compromise is possible. I believe that one can insert voice and anecdote, grabbing attention of the reader, and then back away and take an outside stance to allow reader participation in thought. I believe that his argument is a valid one to make and timely, as well. I have students who were taught not to use their own voice in papers. I don't agree with that at all. Perhaps this reading will bring them back to a love for writing.