Thoughts on "Response to Writing."
"problems that many beginning writers have difficulty articulating" perhaps it is difficult for students to articulate these problems because, by suggesting corrections, the teacher is projecting their own voice onto the student?
"receive feedback on only final drafts" that's something I hadn't thought of before. I feel I've always been made to turn in multiple drafts of a paper; at least one rough draft before the final...how often do teachers collect final (even though they really aren't final at all) papers without having given any previous help?
"open-ended questions on content, the college student..." this is a problem; we shouldn't be waiting until college to utilize this kind of feedback. It may make a certain kind of sense (I guess) to refrain from in-depth responses when children are younger, because (supposedly) they don't have all the skills yet. But by withholding those questions, we stunt the student's growth. There is no reason why we can't comment of the technical stuff and the contextual stuff. The best way to teach a child is through scaffolding, and this falls under scaffolding for sure. How can we possibly expect them to get better when we never meaningfully challenge them.
"self-assess their drafts" this is a good thing, and I agree with this. By self-assessing, the teacher is taken out of the picture and the student is left with only their own voice. And I think this is as easy (and possibly as complicated) as writing those open-ended questions and seeing how the student interprets and uses them.
"specific guidance" this sounds like a very nice way of saying they were told what to do. And this irritates me. They didn't get better because they learned, they got better because you made them do what you wanted them to do. The worst part is a teacher may think they're being helpful by doing this, when really they might even be making things worse. If a student begins to rely on "specific guidance" they'll only end up even less capable than they were before. Instead of being kind of confused, they will be utterly lost.
My overall impression of this piece is that it's n basically everything we've already mentioned before and also some of the information seems a obvious. Of course students prefer feedback that explains why something is good or bad. And it seems natural to me that self-editing would be more educational than just taking revision orders from a teacher.
Already, I'm excited to read this, because we talk a lot about what goes on within the English community, but gender influences and stereotypes aren't normally a hot-button issue. I'm anxious to see what this article says.
"a stereotyped dream of success" i'm wondering, does this apply only to sexuality? or will it refer to the teaching profession as a whole? As teaching is often a profession that is looked down on (I feel, at least).
"power in the academy...is associated with...unchanging set of personal characteristics" makes me think of the inflexibility in curriculum we've discussed in the past. Perhaps it is not the curriculum that is the issue. The curriculum can't change until the people in charge change. Does that mean it is the traditional (for lack of a better word) American ideals that prevent us from progressing?
"no limits placed on the child" kind of a strange thing to say right away in a story. Also not something I feel I would ask a child if we were grocery shopping. Waiting to see where this goes.
"there is no fixed identity" I tend to disagree with this; I think personalities are fairly permanent (not in a bad way).
I feel I'm not really getting the connection she's trying to make with the "hard pea/ cold porridge" thing.
Her stance on lesbian narrators (if I'm reading the passage correctly) is interesting in that she feels it is a limited channel of expression and representation. Maybe my perspective is skewed because I'm straight, but I think I disagree with the idea that a lesbian character (hero?) is limiting to the narrative. I will agree, however, that how something like that is received definitely depends on a bit of political-ness. (Not a word, I know.) "A self-empowerment that depends on binary oppositions" is a very powerful statement, and I am not going to comment on it. I would just like to point out that it is giving me a lot to think about (mostly it makes me evaluate my own perspective on the topic of queerness).
I think I am misunderstanding a bit. When she says "autobiographies," she means real lives? The narratives we live and tell ourselves as they happen?
"categorize individual subjects as different" yes, I can see that. Very true, unfortunately. Sad tot think that someone's orientation is perceived to (negatively) influence their professionalism.
"erase differences...between public and personal narratives" interesting thing to say about a movement in general-- that perhaps, a movement meant to do good is actually not representative of what the majority feels? (Thus the "real me" commentary that follows.)
Interesting that she refers to her bi-sexuality in terms of "straight" and "lesbian(ism)" since this is kind of an issue within the bi-community. The idea that a bi-person is "half-straight" or "half-gay" is often considered offensive, as straight, gay and bi are all seen as completely separate terms with absolutely no overlap whatsoever. Perhaps she uses these terms for ease of communication, but part of me believes if she herself found the accusation offensive, she would be inclined to not use the therm lesbian, or would have disclaim earlier in the piece. This seems to exemplify of the "whole" not representing the majority. The movement says "NOT half-gay. We are BI!" but the author says "straight" and "lesbian."
“unearned privilege” interesting how this wording makes it sound like something the author is guilty of.
"butch or fem... not gay or straight" interesting how physicality contributes to what people think about us. Gender roles and norms and things of the like. Also interesting how she alludes to "butch" being the way a woman carried herself/acted (the soul of a man inside a woman's body).
"lesbian sex wars" is just the most ridiculous phrase I've ever seen in my life.
"butch gender performance" again with the way a woman carries herself.
"project a lesbian persona without formally coming out" she said it neither negatively or positively (very matter-of-factly) but I wonder if this trend makes her sad in some way. Does she get tired of the assumption that she is a lesbian simply because of the way she looks? Despite it being true, I'm sure it gets very tiresome.
"appropriating the power and influence" good in a way, as women often don't enjoy the level of power men do but also very sad that a woman needs t make herself or be perceived as "manly" before being respected enough to even have power in the first place.
"it takes...at least 20 to 40 minutes to comment..." Right away, I relate to this. I often edit papers for friends, and I can say each time I review something, it takes me an hour without fail. Most of this is because I am commenting on their paper. Not even correcting things, as most of the time the paper needs little-to-no correcting.