Johnborczondissertation 08-12-10 Su 10
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Learning and Transformation: How Students and Teachers Define and Shape Each Other in the Classroom and in Pedagogic Literature A dissertation presented to the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of Ohio University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy John A. Borczon August 2010 © 2010 John A. Borczon. All Rights Reserved. 2 This dissertation titled Learning and Transformation: How Students and Teachers Define and Shape Each Other in the Classroom and in Pedagogic Literature by JOHN A. BORCZON has been approved for the Department of English and the College of Arts and Sciences by Mara Holt Associate Professor of English Benjamin M. Ogles Dean, College of Arts and Sciences 3 ABSTRACT BORCZON, JOHN A., Ph.D., August 2010, English Learning and Transformation: How Students and Teachers Define and Shape Each Other in the Classroom and in Pedagogic Literature (193 pp.) Director of Dissertation: Mara Holt This dissertation explores the relationship between the personal and the political in the composition classroom by examining the writing of three pedagogic theorists: Lad Tobin, Ira Shor, and bell hooks. The research focuses on a rhetorical examination of specific texts in order to surface dissonances and reinforcements between theory, practice, and writing style. The researcher also proposes the concept of the oblique rhetorical challenge as a way to introduce strong political perspectives into a rhetoric and composition classroom in a fashion that navigates around the pitfalls of two more common positions concerning political arguments and the classroom: one holds that all highly charged political perspectives should be kept out of the classroom in order to protect students and the opposite view holds that the teacher’s political views should be out in front in order to protect students. Approved: _____________________________________________________________ Mara Holt Associate Professor of English 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my advisor Mara Holt for supporting me during this process. I was fortunate to receive the kind of support, encouragement, and challenge that kept me moving forward throughout this project. I am grateful to my committee (Sherrie Gradin, Albert Rouzie, and Benjamin Bates). Their careful reading and comments helped me refine my ideas and bring them to a much finer point than I could have ever done on my own. I would also like to acknowledge my colleagues Paul Shovlin and Moe Folk who read, encouraged, and provided suggestions as the project developed. Finally I would like to thank my wife Undrahbuyan Baasanjav and my step- daughter Tsolmon Lkhagvasuren for continued support and encouragement. 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract................................................................................................................................3 Acknowledgments ...............................................................................................................4 Chapter 1: Introduction........................................................................................................7 Chapter Two: Lad Tobin ...................................................................................................31 Why: The Goals of Tobin’s Pedagogy ..........................................................................31 What: The Main Activities of Tobin’s Pedagogy..........................................................34 Where: Issues Surrounding Location ............................................................................40 Who: Issues Surrounding the Actors .............................................................................45 How: Issues Surrounding Tools and Techniques ..........................................................52 Writing Issues: Stylistic Features that Promote or Detract from the Pedagogic Goals.61 Conclusion .....................................................................................................................69 Chapter Three: Ira Shor .....................................................................................................72 Why: The Goals of Shor’s Pedagogy ............................................................................72 What: The Main Activities of Shor’s Pedagogy............................................................76 Where: Issues Surrounding Location ............................................................................81 Who: Issues Surrounding the Actors .............................................................................87 How: Issues Surrounding Tools and Techniques ..........................................................96 Writing Issues: Stylistic Features that Promote or Detract from the Pedagogic Goals .....................................................................................................................................109 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................114 Chapter Four: bell hooks .................................................................................................117 6 Why: The Goals of hooks’ Pedagogy..........................................................................117 What: The Main Activities of hooks’ Pedagogy .........................................................120 Where: Issues Surrounding Location ..........................................................................131 Who: Issues Surrounding the Actors ...........................................................................135 How: Issues Surrounding Tools and Techniques ........................................................146 Writing Issues: Stylistic Features that Promote or Detract from the Pedagogic Goals .....................................................................................................................................149 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................156 Chapter Five: Conclusion ................................................................................................161 Learning and Transformation ......................................................................................161 Discussing Maya Angelou in State Prison outside of Columbus, Ohio ......................169 How to Return Sales Merchandise without a Sales Receipt........................................176 Malcolm X and Middle Class White Students ............................................................181 Works Cited.....................................................................................................................188 7 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION In her 1992 essay “Diversity, Ideology, and Teaching Writing,” Maxine Hairston staked out a claim concerning the proper role of freshman composition by criticizing the emergent trends in the field: “I see a new model emerging for freshman writing programs, a model that disturbs me greatly. It’s a model that puts dogma before diversity, politics before craft, ideology before critical thinking, and the social goals of the teacher before the educational needs of the student” (190). Hairston warns that the field of Rhetoric and Composition is being infiltrated by a radical and dangerous strain of thinking that must be resisted. According to Hairston, proponents of this new thinking are bringing left wing ideology into the composition classroom and forcing students to write about such issues as racism, sexism, and class inequalities. Her article documents numerous quotes that highlight the perceived dangers published by opponents in the leading journals. Hairston even presents a list of names of the worst offenders. It is hard to sympathize with Hairston’s fears almost twenty years after the fact. The following sentences demonstrate the fever pitch of the author’s emotional investment in this issue: “Make no mistake—those on the cultural left are not in the least liberal; in fact, they despise liberals as compromising humanists” (187); “They represent precisely the kind of thinking that leads to ‘re-education camps’ in totalitarian governments, to putting art in the service of propaganda, and to making education always the instrument of the state” (188). However, if Hairston’s rhetorical flair feels over the top, her point of view concerning the proper goals of the composition classroom continues to simmer beneath the surface of discussions concerning the goals and boundaries of the field. In 2005, Richard Fulkerson in “Composition at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century” remarked 8 that Hairston’s article made unfortunate ad homenim arguments, and that she did not succeed at presenting the range of her pedagogical ideas (666). Jaime Armin Mejia in his response to the Fulkerson article observes: “Fulkerson's treatment of Hairston's 1992 CCC essay in his own, while somewhat apologetic, clearly situates his with hers. He continues to misunderstand that all education is indeed indoctrinating; he further considers such a perspective as an ‘obvious absurdity’” (750). Such an exchange mirrors similar concerns that John Trimbur, Robert Wood, Ron Strickland, William Thelin William Rouster and Tone Mester made in their 1993 responses to Hairston’s original article. Hairston’s concerns also seem to surface whenever scholars within the field address various manifestations of the cultural wars that attack the English classroom. David Lazere’s College English review of Stanley