Hi Rob,

As I wrote to Marc, this is what I do in class, but perhaps I make it more 
of a skein, the sharing going both ways. If I don't learn as much from the 
students as they learn from me, I always feel something's not working. 
This is the kind of class organization that I used at Nova Scotia (when 
David Askevold was teaching there) and it tends to work well. There are 
always issues today, though, around adjunct - the students come into the 
classroom at first having no idea who I am, why they should listen to 
anyone at all, particularly when it seems that other teachers are telling 
them that humanities are irrelevant. So I'm put at times in the uncomfor- 
table position of having to 'contradict' studio bias. When I've taught 
adjunct elsewhere, the situation was better. This is my fourth 'stint' at 
SVA, and it's always been uphill.

I wouldn't say what I'm teaching is a skill or skills, although the 
ability to think critically is part of it. Skill usually implies method- 
ology. I don't think the students I work with are intimidated at all - 
that comes in the studio areas. On the other hand, I do think I reach them 
by emphasizing the confused planetary ecology and its potential futures - 
this is something they (and I) can relate to. It's a kind of moral imper- 
ative, which I'm always suspicious of myself. (I don't want to sound as if 
I don't know what I'm doing in the classroom - I do; I'm concerned about 
filling out or modifying the confused skein of identifications that form 
the core of the course. I was handed this course to teach - it's not my 
choice of subject-matter - so I'm trying to find ways to approach the 
subject/s.)

Thanks greatly, and I hope I'm not taking up too much of list-space on 
this.
- Alan


On Wed, 30 Dec 2009, Rob Myers wrote:

> On 30/12/09 13:19, marc garrett wrote:
>> In respect of my own experience when teaching - supporting, advising,
>> and sharing information with students is one of the most important
>> aspects of connecting with others.
> Yes. People can read books anywhere, and if they can't afford the latest
> theory tomes then there's always the internets. What people can only get
> somewhere like an educational institution is the experience of working
> through this knowledge with other people who are learning how to do so
> and with people who are skilled and experienced in doing so. Even for
> knowledge-based courses, what's being taught are *skills*, the skill not
> to be intimidated by new ideas or bodies of knowledge. The skill of
> inhabiting a body of knowledge and being able to extend and critique it.
>
>> . As soon as anyone is
>> informed of anything it changes their own position, but without
>> knowledge and responsibilities of why and how to use it, they are merely
>> drones following mannerisms rather being empowered, in understanding the
>> bigger picture.
>>
>
> Yes. The thing people always wanted when I was teaching at the CEA was
> *context* and *reasons". *Why* are they being taught this, *what* is the
> point of it, and *how* does it relate to the rest of the course? When
> people know that you can ask them to take responsibility for their
> learning and they can provide feedback and guidance on the course that
> helps you learn as well.
>
> "Praxis" is a useful word, I've since learnt. ;-)
>
> - Rob.
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>


==
email archive: http://sondheim.rupamsunyata.org/
webpage http://www.alansondheim.org sondheimat gmail.com, panix.com
==
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour

Reply via email to