recentpopularlog in

robertogreco :   3

John Warner on Twitter: "I see defenses of the five-paragraph essay which describe the template as "training wheels" for developing writers. I unpack this in "Why They Can't Write" arguing that training wheels are not a help in developing essential skills
"I see defenses of the five-paragraph essay which describe the template as "training wheels" for developing writers. I unpack this in "Why They Can't Write" arguing that training wheels are not a help in developing essential skills, but a hack to prevent academic disaster.

This is true of training wheels on bikes. Research has shown that training wheels actually prevent the development of the most important skill for bike riding...balance. The training wheels function as a guard against children cracking their heads when supervision isn't available

Those bike training wheels may be a necessity so children can get around on a bike without being in physical danger, but experts now recommend children learning on "balance bikes" where their feet touch the ground from a young age. When it's time for a pedal bike, they're ready.

I believe one of the reasons we see the 5PE as a useful set of training wheels is because we fear (with justification) what happens if students have to practice the writing equivalent of balance (making choices) from the get go. None of this is the fault of teachers.

When students are being judged against standardized assessments from an early age, and teachers are judged on student performance, turning to the 5PE is a way of preventing potential disaster. It's sensible, rational, but I argue, it's not helping students learn to write.

IMO, writing is thinking, so anything that keeps students from developing their thinking and making choices ultimately delays or prevents their development. The 5PE is part of a system that punishes exploration, choice, freedom, because of an obsession with "assessment."

The 5PE has a long history that's always tied to assessment. It hasn't always been a part of schooling, however. I'm 48 and wasn't introduced to the 5PE until high school when it was introduced as a hack for AP exams. The saving grace is I'd already learned to think like a writer

When teachers say that students "need" the 5PE, I always want to know what they need it for, and it's almost always driven by a particular assessment, an assessment which may not be well-aligned with the experiences which help writers develop. This disconnect is at every level.

For a good chunk of my own teaching career, I enforced the disconnect by giving students more sophisticated versions of the 5PE in order to prevent disaster in "college" writing. Over time, came to believe I my prescriptions were hurting long term development more than helping.

My own big pedagogical shift came when I decided to look at my approach not as helping them do well on the assignment at hand, but looking more longterm, helping students develop their writing "practices" (knowledge, skills, attitudes, habits of mind of writers).

Taking that longer view often resulted in student writing artifacts that were not as accomplished as when I used more prescriptive methods. That was hard to swallow. But...I could see students engaged with a more challenging and ultimately rewarding struggle. That seemed worth it

As I became more familiar with the research on writing for transfer, I saw I'd stumbled on something lots of folks were already studying. Building a writing practice is just one framework for thinking about how experiences in writing transfer from one occasion to another.

Importantly, I had the freedom to make this shift. Even as a contingent college instructor, no one was breathing down my neck and I wasn't beholden to my students' performances on high stakes assessments. K-12 teachers are not allowed this same freedom.

Ultimately, this is why I decided that the front part of Why They Can't Write would have to examine the systemic problems underlying the teaching and learning of writing. Pedagogy is not a fix by itself. It isn't even the most important factor.

As long as we have a system which privileges compliance and conformity and constrains teacher and student freedom and agency, the 5PE will be useful. When it's a route to AP credit or college admission, it could be malpractice not to teach it.

But this is not the same as teaching students to write. It's training them to pass assessments, assessments which may be important, but which hold little meaning, particularly to students, which turns writing into something alienating, rather than liberating, a big problem IMO.

I do not criticize teachers who use the 5PE, but I will always question what's underneath that "need." Usually when we go looking, we see things that are actually not conducive to learning like standardization and surveillance, which inevitably lead to anxiety, or worse.

We must give K-12 teachers the freedom and power to work with the longterm development of their students in mind, rather than being beholden to these assessments which measure little that's meaningful. Without that freedom, we're stuck in this system.

To come full circle back to the training wheels theme, we have to make it so when students are developing their writing practices, they get to "fail" productively, rather than failure being something like flying over the handlebars and cracking a skull.

With writing, "mistakes" and error should always be occasions for learning, not punishment, and definitely not punishment of teachers. I spent years developing Why They Can't Write, and based on early readers, there's already stuff I'd change. That's exciting.

It's exciting because my ideas are being taken seriously by other people with similar concerns. My ideas matter to me, and them, and those ideas can be made better. Why wouldn't I want my students to have the same joy? It can be done, I believe.

Here is where I plug a forthcoming book which is my attempt to create the conditions under which students can experience similar pleasure with writing. Curriculum isn't going to save us by itself, but this is my best (current) attempt at living my values.

And a coda. Here's a link to a dissertation by @jtdavisii which includes a deeply researched and fascinating history of the use of the 5PE. That part starts on P. 53 "

[See also:

Just got this important book in the mail... only a few pages in and I want every teacher who teaches writing (in other words, all teachers across all content areas) to read it.
@biblioracle: I see defenses of the five-paragraph essay which describe the template as "training wheels" for developing writers. I unpack this in "Why They Can't Write" arguing that training wheels are not a help in developing…

Especially consider what @biblioracle says about the faulty 5PE=training wheels analogy. Training wheels don’t teach balance. 5PE doesn’t teach thinking. #DisruptWriting

I’ve also heard Ts say that 5PE is a scaffold. But scaffolds are temporary. A scaffold’s purpose is literally to render itself unnecessary. Yet the 5PE is being perpetrated into the middle and upper grades. #DisruptWriting

Not to mention the fact that the 5PE, as a tool of standardization, is ultimately a tool that oppresses individual human voices—& by not making space for linguistic diversity & freedom, the 5PE is not culturally relevant pedagogy. (Or, I should say, it teaches culture but whose?)

is #disruptwriting gonna be a thing??? online writing groups? sharing favorite mentor texts???

Bring it. I'm ready. Still learning so much about process and potential. I still hold a lot of fear of experimenting which is why fiction writing stays out of bounds for me.

I'm currently reading a book on trauma and memoir writing and its funny how many of these writers started off trying to write fiction instead. it's funny how desperately we cling to genre.

and it's funny how desperately important the culture of a proofreader is. months ago I asked 5 (dope, wonderful) people to read a draft. only one caught the typo I made in the first sentence.

@TheJLV was the only Dominican. I forgot the A in tambora.

it made me wonder how student writing changes when their primary reader-- the reader they give the most weight to-- is probably a white, middle class woman. what slips by? what changes does the teacher recommend that a cultural, racial peer wouldn't?

when we prioritize the teacher as the most important reader-- the teacher grades, praises, deems finished or incomplete-- are we training kids to write for a white audience? and how can we disrupt that?

Yes, yes we are. And I’d argue that most of what we’re doing in schools is teaching not just for a white audience but Whiteness itself. How to disrupt? Culturally relevant, responsive, sustaining pedagogy. I wonder how many Ts see their instruction as grounded in CSP, though...

who gets to judge what is culturally sustaining? might be the next question. educators. families. students. communities. some combination of the four?

Yes, definitely some combination. Too often it’s the culture of the teacher/school (Whiteness) that is perpetuated under guises like “college and career ready.”

my new site yaught me that the only expert on a kid's culture is the kid. which I think I knew personally? my mother and I did not react the same way to the Poet X.

but I didn't know it professionally until immigration shelters.

and now I'm always afraid, because the overwhelming majority of my kids are headed to U.S. schools. and there are so many aspects of culture we don't discuss in context of undocumented immigration."]
fiveparagraphessays  writing  howweteach  teaching  howwewrite  teachingwriting  eucation  johnarner  triciaebarvia  sherrispelic   
december 2018 by robertogreco
Dr Fish Philosopher🐟 on Twitter: "1. #AmAnth2018 is taking place in the midst of one of the deadliest fires in California history. If breathing in the smoke of burning trees, homes, cities doesn't convince us that we need radically different ways to en
"1. #AmAnth2018 is taking place in the midst of one of the deadliest fires in California history. If breathing in the smoke of burning trees, homes, cities doesn't convince us that we need radically different ways to engage beyond conference center model...I don't know what will

2. I have deep respect for labour that goes into planning these events. I know folks are doing their best+striving to make spaces for connection. I hope we can build on that spirit+find ways to support relationality while tending to the disasters (thinking with @hystericalblkns )

3. Things I am thinking about after the #RefuseHAU #HAUTalk panel is: how do we ensure those who are most marginalized within anthro (and beyond) are seen, heard, cited while also disrupting the structures that operate to exclude myriad voices. What can we salvage from anthro?

4. This year, with the smoke, #AmAnth2018 really feels like a salvage operation (thinking here with Anna Tsing). What can we take from the existing structures -- what can we reconfigure to make these more capacious spaces at the end of certain worlds?

5. It may very well be that the environment refuses these spaces for us -- makes it that much harder to operate as 'normal'. What ethical imaginations can we mobilize to maintain and foster connection while considering our nonhuman kin literally burning/vaporizing as we meet."

[See also:
"Two takeaways from #AmAnth18: ‘the smoke is telling us something’ @ZoeSTodd | ‘anti-capitalism is the only sane position - the alternative is just f*cking ridiculous’ @profdavidharvey"
"One utopian vision after smoky #AmAnth2018. Make the megaconference a biennial. Imagine instead, every other year, dozens of simultaneous regional gatherings, each streaming sessions online and holding virtual meetups. Gather with folks in person & tune in elsewhere. Speculating."
"Here's a description of the distributed model we used at @culanth for #displace18 this spring. Registration for $10, less than 1% of typical carbon emissions, and an average panel audience of 125 people. An alternative to the empty conference center room. "
"Reading this, I also realized I was able to attend more talks at Displacements by tuning in from home (cost: $10), than I was able to attend at #AmAnth2018 by actually flying to San Jose for two days with two days of travel on either end to present my paper (cost: over $900)."
"I like this, although for those of us at small teaching colleges with little intellectual community, conferences are a welcome (though exhausting and expensive) change."
"I have this problem. There are universities close by who could be more welcoming to those of us not working at research institutions. I am thrilled that this conversation is happening."
"Probably the most expensive academic conference I have ever participated/presented in coming from the Global South. My university covered me but what about those scholars who will never get an opportunity because AAA provides no bursaries or lower rates for membership. Ripoff."
"I'm trying to imagine how to salvage the promise of connection & kinship without binging so much on carbon & vaporizing life. No simple answer. Building & deepening regional intellectual communities as an alternative? A social foundation for a distributed conference model."
"Yes, the conversation today has given me lots to think about. How do we balance need for meaningful opportunities to engage while also addressing the visceral environmental, economic issues that come any professional organization converging on a city."
"I would also love to see develop a virtual platform for alternative access to the @AmericanAnthro annual meeting, not to substitute, but to supplement. Those who can't afford to attend in person, or can't stomach the carbon burden, shouldn't have to fly this far in a digital era."
"There's an obsession with attending all annual meetings. It's not necessary, exhausting and takes time from regional networking that could emphasize not just presenting but working with each other. Also, AAA could alternate between virtual and in-person (+virtual) meetings."]
zoetodd  conferences  sustainability  climatechange  2018  labor  accessibility  environment  anticapitalism  capitalism  davidharvey  lysalcayna-stevens    anandpandian  displacements  displacement  events  regional  distributed  decentralization  economics  academia  highered  culturalanthropology  anthropology  emissions  audience  virtual  digital  annalowenhaupttsing  nehavora  michaeloman-reagan  kristinwilson  nausheenanwar  #displace18  highereducation  education 
november 2018 by robertogreco
When We Mourn Paul Walker, We’re Really Mourning The Death Of Male Friendships | Decider | Where To Stream Movies & Shows on Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant, HBO Go
"But Vin Diesel’s modeling of grief is perhaps the most interesting. For most of 2015, Diesel has been eulogizing Walker in every interview, at every promotional stop, and in every other Facebook and Instagram post, referring to Walker as his brother, using the term of endearment Pablo, talking candidly about how sad he was after Walker’s death, and posting pictures and videos of the two of them together. In March he announced that he had named his newborn daughter Pauline after his late friend.

All of this emotion can be explained by what I think we’re really mourning when we mourn Paul Walker: the end of a resonant example of a particular kind of male friendship absent from most of our own lives. That is, when we mourn Paul Walker, we are also mourning the end of Brian and Dom.

Male friendship in America, at present, is in a bad way. As sociologist Lisa Wade reports, “Of all people in America, adult, white, heterosexual men have the fewest friends. Moreover, the friendships they have, if they’re with other men, provide less emotional support and involve lower levels of self-disclosure and trust than other types of friendships.” However, these same men crave deeper, more intimate friendships. As Wade explains, “Men desire the same level and type of intimacy in their friendships as women, but they aren’t getting it.” How come? Misogyny, homophobia, and men’s long-standing anxieties about being “real men,” basically. Wade writes:
To be close friends, men need to be willing to confess their insecurities, be kind to others, have empathy and sometimes sacrifice their own self-interest. “Real men,” though, are not supposed to do these things. They are supposed to be self-interested, competitive, non-emotional, strong (with no insecurities at all), and able to deal with their emotional problems without help. Being a good friend, then, as well as needing a good friend, is the equivalent of being girly.

“When men do have especially close relationships,” notes Alana Massey, “we teasingly call them ‘bromances,’ as if there must be something amorous between two men who choose to spend time together one-on-one.”

In effect, what both Wade and Massey are saying is that somehow straight men in America have internalized the idea that intimate male friendships are gay.

In a weird way, queer theory also encourages this. It would be easy to read, for instance, the onscreen relationship between Brian and Dom as queer in some way, i.e., that the Fast and Furious movies are secretly a romantic love story between Paul Walker’s Brian and Vin Diesel’s Dom. Let me be clear: this is a legitimate – even fun! – reading. The deepest and most-sustained love relationship in the series is between Brian and Dom. Though they each have female partners – Mia (Jordana Brewster) and Letty (Michelle Rodriguez), respectively – their primary emotional sustenance over the course of the franchise comes from each other. Slash fiction exploring this idea in greater depth isn’t hard to find online.

Significantly, the franchise doesn’t explicitly deny this sort of queer reading. There’s none of the anxious disavowal of homosexuality you find in movies such as I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry and I Love You, Man. Nor does Vin Diesel display any of the fear of emotion Wade talks about.

But I don’t think the reflexive queer reading – progressive though it may be – helps explain why Furious 7 can bring a theater full of young straight men to tears. No, I think there’s something else going on here. As Rachel Vorona Cote writes, “Friendship is not a pale imitation of sexual romance. It is a romance unto itself.”

In his book Spiritual Friendship, Wesley Hill argues that friendship today is “a form of love that’s in danger of being downgraded or dismissed in our imaginations.” One of the reasons for this, he contends, is our tendency to think “that the desire for sex is the secret truth of every relationship, so that any mutual liking or interest must be something more than chaste affection.” From this point of view, the intimate friendship between Brian and Dom in the Fast and Furious movies must really be a cover for a sexual relationship. But what might happen, Hill asks, if we take a friendship like Brian and Dom’s at face value? How might that challenge our views of what a friendship can be?

Hill argues “friendship can and should be understood along the lines of a vowed or committed relationship, much like a marriage or a kinship bond.” Hill asks us to imagine “friendship as more stable, permanent, and binding,” “friends more like the siblings we’re stuck with, like it or not, than like our acquaintances,” and “at least some of our friends as, in large measure, tantamount to family.”

You might think the writings of a gay celibate Christian writer like Hill and a multi-billion dollar street racing franchise would have different takes on friendships, but you’d be wrong. As a matter of fact, lines such as Dom’s “I don’t have friends, I’ve got family” and (to Brian/Paul at the end of the film) “You’ll always be my brother” wouldn’t look out of place in Hill’s book. Brian and Dom’s friendship in the movies and Paul and Vin’s friendship in real life are best understood, I would argue, as different versions of the same “spiritual friendship.” Theirs is a union that manages to be resolutely heterosexual but not homophobic, sincere but not self-serious, strong but sensitive.

In a world where straight men are often still worried about being perceived as feminine or gay and thus fail to form close bonds with other men, Brian and Dom’s bond is an important symbolic outlet for normalizing “spiritual friendship” between men. The Fast and Furious franchise offers a post-bromance model of male friendship and suggests a new call to seriousness about friendship’s role and importance. Thus, in mourning Paul Walker, we mourn not only the end of Brian and Dom’s relationship, but also the end of Paul and Vin’s, as well as the dearth of such relationships outside of the Fast and Furious franchise. We mourn our own inadequacy. That’s why it hurts so much. But that mourning is also a celebration, a celebration that something such as Paul Walker’s Teen Choice Award, while seemingly trivial, is one small part of."

[back in circulation because: "Wiz Khalifa’s See You Again is now the most-viewed YouTube video of all time"

via: ]

[Related: "It’s Not Just Mike Pence. Americans Are Wary of Being Alone With the Opposite Sex."

"This came in my circles so I'd like to make a thread about it: One conversation we rarely have is about the lack of male female friendships."

thread continues:
"There were some news articles floating around at the beginning of the year about Pence and his rule that he doesn't meet women alone, ever.

Since then, studies have emerged about this problem being an epidemic, presumably not only in the US, especially in workplaces.

The gist of it is that people believe being alone with a woman other than your partner is inappropriate by default. Just think about this.

There is an absolutely insane believe that male female friendships are not real, are inappropriate, are dangerous and problematic.

Think about what impact that has on women's rights, our work, the respect for us. This means, men in power specifically don't know us.

It means that when we talk to men, their underlying concern is that it could be seen as inappropriate - or even feels inappropriate to them.

This obstructs equality more than we may realise. It means there is a barrier of understanding women's ideas and thoughts to begin with.

It ramps up all biases that people pile up and that obstruct change and progress. It means it influences the way people hire.

And no wonder if you think about it: The representation in media, on TV, anywhere of male female friendships is basically non-existent.

All stories we see about male female interaction are romances, jealousy dramas, even work relationships are depicted as romantic.

We. Fail. To. Tell. Stories. Of. Male. Female. Friendships.

We hugely fail telling them, because we believe they don't exist or are boring

There is a whole other layer to this where male female friendships are only possible when one of the parties is "ugly"/nerdy.

The gist of it is: We need to foster healthy, meaningful friendships and colleague relationships to fix gender inequality.

As creators, we can be part of this by telling those stories. Re-define how men and women relate to each other, represent real friendships."]
mattthomas  men  friendship  sexuality  gender  2015  jenniferscheurle    2017wesleyhill  brotherhood  society  bromances  alanamassey  heterosexuality  emotion  emotions  friendships  masculinity  misogyny  homophobia  intimacy  fastandfurious  georgecarlin  vindiesel  paulwalker  wizkhalifa 
july 2017 by robertogreco

Copy this bookmark:

to read