04 November 2006
Script-ure
I'm more than 1/3 of the way through these exams. Apparently "Quetzalcoatl" and "Christ" are synonyms. I have now read more exams that contain some variation of the phrase "Cortes was seen as Christ (or Jesus) returning by the Aztecs" than the phrase "Cortes was seen as Quetzalcoatl returning." Of course, BOTH of these statements are actually inaccurate, which was discussed at length in lecture, but so far only one student has commented on that (there are not many A's in this bunch). It's kind of amazing how strongly people will cling to their scripts. If we spent days and days in lecture (and in the texts) discussing the way in which the conquest largely hinged on the indigenous allies of the Spanish and was not this "great man" narrative wherein twenty white guys defeat thousands of natives because of various areas of superiority, what 90% of the students seem to have heard or taken away was "the conquest was this great man narrative wherein twenty white guys defeated thousands of natives." Whatever version of the script they learned in high school, or grade school, or Disney movies, they just carry forward. It doesn't matter that the entire class is an attempt to disrupt that precise script. They simply block out the parts that problematize it and hear any restatement of it, even in the negative, as a reaffirmation of its truth. It's really quite astounding. I seriously have no idea how one combats the ability of people to hear the exact opposite of what you are saying. Back to grading warrior mode. (Thanks, C.) Slash, burn.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
It is cultural hegemony at work. Not to mention that these kids are the products of an entirely new generation that multi-tasks their lives. They have the attention spans of gnats, which works perfectly for the powers that be because they have mastered the art of picking up soundbites that they hear repeatedly and reproducing them over and over and over ad nauseum! Clearly, the lecture format is no longer going to the the trick and the powerpoint presentation feeds right into the problem...so how do we overcome this? One thing I realized in a class I TA'd last year, the classroom presentation & reading journal scares the shit out of them because they actually have to process material. And they go to town like busy little bees. Not to mention that they listen to each others valley girl/boy itterations with much more care than they do the profs/ta's. It is like some kind of like weird cult language that they have like all tunned into, yet they can like totaly like decode it! I saw Vijay Prashad put radical pedagogy into practice last year and...I was impressed. He gave students assignments that forced them to uncover the power dynamics that frame the world around them. For example, he has his students research the names of the people that the campus buildings are named after and to uncover the contributions they have made to education...turns out they are all old imperialists smuggling opium or contemporary corrupt capitalists. Then he has the students report in a round table fashion to each other...which gets them all fired up. It is interesting to think about what you could do in history lecture class to produce that kind of critical response and awareness....? I'm still pondering. Good luck getting through the last bunch!
I think you're definitely right about the use of presentations to force them to do some thinking rather than just selective hearing. But, yeah, how to do that in a giant lecture without sections is, as you say, a mystery. But then again, that's not really the point of our education system, to generate large numbers of critical thinkers, so it's no wonder our structure favors the large lecture. And I just read an essay which referred to the "antics" of the conquistadores. Wow.
In my many meanderings through the web trying to find a decent, well paying job for next year, I came across a description of Chinese students as having a very different conception of critical thinking and classroom participation than you would find in the States. Essentially, they want to copy down what you say and regurgitate it properly for exams, according to the website. My question is - they do less critical thinking and engagement in discussion than American students? Really? Shoot me now.
I don't know that different means worse in this case. Based on my experience with these current midterms, I would be ecstatic if all they did was regurgitate the information accurately. Those are my (2) "A" papers -- they're not making any arguments they weren't already provided with in class. Fine, the professor or lecturer or section leader can do the critical thinking for them, as long as they memorize it correctly they're at least learning something of value. Regurgitating inaccurate information they remember from a TV-movie because they text-messaged their BFF all through lecture does not count as engagement. It shouldn't even count as attendance. Man, I'm bitter today. My self-described reputation as a soft grader is going out the window with these midterms. I foresee some whining in office hours next week.
it's always good to crush their spirit with the midterms anyway. They tend to work harder the second half of the term, or some will withdraw. Either way, you've achieved at least something. Hack away! :)
Post a Comment