A Few Thoughts on My First Reading of Engaging Ideas
1) On page 4 of the text, Bean shares Brookfield's understanding of critical thinking as being composed of two central activities: "identifying and challenging assumptions and exploring alternative ways of thinking and acting." Bean continues, on the same page, that writing should not be primarily seen as a communication skill, but rather as the process and product of critical thought. The most successful writing assignments are problem-oriented. That is, following Dewey who saw problems as "naturally motivating," Bean quotes Meyers who argues that teachers should begin class with problems. Because problems are naturally motivating, intriguing, and attractive to us, they can be used to ground our students' engagment in the subject at hand. Writing becomes the tool of thinking through the problem. Writing is a tool of thought.
I really appreciate the two central activities that Brookfield identifies as the essence of critical thought. In the philosophy classes that I teach both of these activities are the activities that we are engaged in. To identify a problem as a problem demands that students come to terms with the fact that they are indeed walking around with assumptions about reality, assumptions that frame their understanding of the world. Recognizing a problem as a problem usually requires that students come to understand their assumptions as assumptions, and then to ask the questions that will allow them to come to terms with what is the case, and what really is at issue.
I am reminded here of the Socratic method which involves first getting a person to recognize that he or she does not fully understand what it is he or she claims to know, then bringing them to a point of confusion because confusion is a naturally uncomfortable place and if students are then given the tools to work out of this confusion, they will.
This is where I see how writing plays an essential role. For me, writing requires a much deeper level of engagement with the material than talking does, or even reading because writing means that I have to process something for myself in order to be able to put it on paper. But here there are specific types of writing that are more helpful than others. So in my classes, what I find is very helpful to the students is to give a very structured assignment based on a problem. For example, the problem of knowledge. Here the assignment would require the student to first explain what is the problem, what is at issue. Then the student needs to reconstruct a particular argument given that strives to resolve the problem. And finally, the student must consider whether this argument does and explain why or why not and offer his or her own resolution.
But the difficult part of this is sometimes recognizing the problem because this means that a student has to awaken their own consciousness enough to be able to view her own assumptions of reality. In chapter 2, Bean discusses the French word, "brouillon," to place in disorder or to scramble. I found this discussion both interesting and helpful. It has made me rethink the idea of the rough draft as not the plan or roadmap, but the place for the confusion, the place for recognizing and re-cognizing the problem. I have found that my most successful teaching occurs when students become intellectually stimulated. This problem approach that Bean writes about in these first two chapters appears to be a great method to engage students, especially in terms of "ill-structured problems," problems that don't algorithmically yield one single right answer, but that demand that a student process it herself and then make her own argument.
Finally, the suggestions on revision have also caused me to rethink my assignments, to incorporate more creative time in the writing process and to emphasize the process and not just the product.
Fantastic post. You make me want to take your class or perhaps teach philosophy. I think you must constantly be challenging your students to think critically.
ReplyDeleteAs far as what you said about the chapter having you rethink drafting, this notion of "brouillon" or a rough draft is very much part of writing process pedagogy, but it goes back to his discussion of how we see the relationship between thought and language. If language is separate from thinking, then we package this thought into language. But a different (and I think better view) is to see that language and thought are bound together--in fact, little or no thought is possible without language. Hence, as we communicate in language we are really also connecting to our thinking.
It is good then to use language to push and extend our thinking. I guess I also wanted to say that the notion of a rough draft or sometimes called a "zero draft" is one in which the writer just gets their thought on the page without concerns for correctness or what may be the final end product. Peter Elbow has a lot to say about freewriting drafts.
So often writing is used for testing and there is heavy pressure of getting it right the first time--sort of like swinging the bat and hitting a homerun each time. Zero drafts are like practice swings away from the plate. No pressure for correctness... yet. Out of chaos comes form, so be chaotic.
I, too, would love to take your class...it would be difficult for me NOT to discuss, ask questions & reframe. Erika Lindemann says that we teach students "how writing discovers the self and shares it with others." Knowing HOW (operations) and knowing THAT (truths)are central. If students can find truth for themselves, and organize and use these truths in their own favor (expression of deep learning)then we've done our jobs.
ReplyDeleteI'm thinking about zero-draft days -- writing in class to eliminate the absence of drafts in the process.