The project I have in mind is in favor of multi-modal use of technology to enhance the original point of the written text and I believe it is important in order for the point to be without question and perfectly clear, as many modes should be in play as/if possible. The idea is not without a question of the original point be able to stay in place. My idea is to demonstrate in timeline fashion how conveying an idea and or story, adaptation to newer technology and its use can further make that point. The question is when say a story evolves from the pages of a novel to a screen adaptation, can the original emphasis be lost in the new form.

 

For example in my Eng. 465 class, we have read the original novel and then watched the movie adaptation, where I have noticed what was emphasized in the novel became a background theme in the movie. Example in Color Purple, the novel’s point of an untold perspective of women in the early to mid-nineteen hundreds, changed to a different emphasis of just a tale of the time. I feel the importance of the author’s work became diluted in the film version. Another example is in contrast to the last Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton, which really keeps the author’s main theme alive and really makes an impact with the music choice, special effects, images created, and character enhancements. It’s this point of added Multimodality use that serves as an example for use in education.

 

My project is to take a look at a classic piece of literature and through a process of viewing its evolution in time if the original point is intact after the mode of communication is changed. The piece I have in mind is the work of Mary Shelly, her Frankenstein. The many adaptations include stage, silent film, talkies, and every time technology was advanced changes were made and even though many hands have touched the story I think Shelly’s main idea of the story remains intact. The story line has been clearly portrayed and easier to understand.

 

The project itself will make use video and if anyone has not committed to a project I would welcome the help.

The idea of identifying a standard for Academic paper writing was discussed in our 30 group. The idea was brought up, if we could simply create a work sheet or “Template.” That would not only aid the students in our tutoring classes with “Structure,” but would give them key areas to focus on when work shopping papers of the other students. Later bringing up the idea in the class discussion, we found out how flawed our thoughts were and instructed in the error of our ways. Something along the lines we were conformist to a conventional standard that is essentially built on and around restrictive concepts of writing academic papers, that disallows creativity and at best is a malfunctioning generic structure put into to place by Satan and/or Hitler. The 5 paragraph paper format for some time now has been the standard for academic writing structure.
The proof of the need for a better system was the fact we wanted a single template in the first place. The students in our tutoring classes have more than one instructor for their writing classes. We were hearing confusion from the students in the form of comparing requirements for their assignments of “Compare and Contrast papers” (We were also informed of the non-existence of this form), but hearing the diversity of definition, structure, and emphasis we felt if we had one form the playing field would at least be evened out. The next point was to understand there is a way, but continued trust in the 5 paragraph was not the answer.
Before the actual method would be given, an article would need to be read first Activity Theory and Its Implication for Writing Instruction by David R. Russell. The idea of how Activity Theory is understood is to realize there are many different departments here at Chico State and in those departments’ specifics that divide them from the other departments; such as language, research strategy, terminology, and many other specifics and differences. Just as we discovered our students had different instructions and different needs from each instructor, meaning a template would only represent our ideas of a 5 paragraph paper, but not meet the requirements of that particular instructor and/or department. Russell gave a metaphor to show how this template, although a conventional standard of academic writing for years, fails to take in the needs of each department. Russell’s explanation had to do with ball handling, a person learns how to throw, field, hit, and pitch a baseball. The baseball is like the standard 5 paragraph paper, it works well for the English Departments of Baseball (For the sake of the argument), but when the Anthropology department needs a ball for their game of Four-Square the tool of the baseball is not going to work and neither are the skills throwing, pitching, hitting, and fielding going to help the Anthropologists have what they need to play their game. In order to achieve what is needed for the Anthro bunch, a bigger softer red ball will be needed to get that highly interesting game of four-square going.
A common place of writing would need to be in place, it would need to be easily adaptable to each department, and still all of the department’s specific requirements would be met. An article by Mark Wiley The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (and Why We Need to Resist), gives us a method that meets these requirements. The Method is that of Jane Schaffer’s, which by design is more succinct and according to the article “Schaffer claims this format replicates what is found in high scoring essays on district wide tests…”(pg62). If the method is seen as no different as the old standard and it is easily adaptable to each department, then there may commonality after all.

I have always wondered; no matter the class subject, how the theory I am learning can be used in the world practically. Putting theory into action is built into our class by design, providing a way to not only act as an apprenticeship to teaching and benefit 130 students with our learned theory. For instance on Wednesday my mentor Hailey began work-shopping with the students in class. The students scheduled to workshop their paper we not present, so two of the students volunteered to go into their place. The first student began feeling out the language of what he saw as English Department Academic Terminology, immediately my thoughts went to “Inventing a University” by David Bartholomae. Allowing the student to continue explaining himself, we learned he was having the most difficulty creating his initial thesis and his first thought was of his instructor’s expectations for the paper stressing the thesis. Bartholomae stated in his article, when addressing the reader “If my students are going to write for me by knowing who I am…it means knowing what I know; it means having the knowledge of a professor of English” (pg. 9). The student in my case was showing the stress of knowing his instructor; who already knows more about the subject of his paper is going to teach, the reading of his paper would include critique of the facts themselves. After my Mentor’s suggestions and her asking the others in the group for suggestions I was asked to contribute. Armed with Bartholomae’s article in my head (Theory from class), I first addressed the pressure of “Audience awareness,” as Bartholomae suggested I told him about “Describing a baseball to a Martian.” The explanation would do two things for them 1). He/she would be able to get rid of the pressure of the instructor’s read 2). Allow them to write in a manner of teaching the Martian, essentially putting them in a place described by the article, “To imagine the needs and goals of the reader…” (pg.10). I also shared a lesson I learned from my Rhetoric instructor Chris Fosen, the lesson was how to approach a paper in a more unconventional manner, but results in the same academic paper requirement.

1. Think about your message to the reader
2. With your message in mind construct the “Conclusion paragraph.”
3. Go back and start writing your support paragraphs.
4. Using these paragraphs form the body of the Thesis paragraph.
5. Last thing read through and form your thesis statement.

This has been a life saver for me in construction of my papers and has met with approval of my instructors. The student took the information and at that moment began to start writing, while the other student began her workshop paper. The end of class he had formed a template for his comparison paper. The dynamic of my Mentor’s workshop is a great example of how workshops should work and helped me take theory and use it in this setting for practical application of that theory.

 

Conversations with colleagues, reading blogs, and my own experience it can be said Bartholomae’s article Inventing The University, is not an article that would be understood in the first read, but is worth the effort of the second or third time through; even a fourth, as in my case. In saying that, after wrestling with David Bartholomae, I was able to finally understand his need to have us recognize the differences between students coming into our specific Branches and their diverse skill levels in appropriating what is needed individually to move on to their next step. How the ones who already have been through the steps of becoming “Insiders” in the department have a responsibility to help the Newbie advance successfully. Bartholomae, also made a lot of suggestions in method and hidden meanings, in order for us to see how to help the Newbies and there were two that stood out to me.

• The title of the article’s meaning.
• The idea of how a student should look at their reader.

First the title itself was not clear to right away, but as I read on the ideas of and got into the areas of “Commonplace” and the “Discourse of our community” an idea came to mind to consider University not as the place of study (CSUChico), but the separate departments and people that make up the departments faculty, undergraduates, graduate, and even the newbies to the university. Each department is a community of its own and all of the people belonging to the community are expected to communicate and have an understanding of everything that happens within the “Branch.” Each “Branch” as Bartholomae referred to in the article, has its own “language” or terminology specific to each department; in other words, English dept. speaks Englishease, Philosophy speaks Philosophyease, Anthropology intern speak Anthhrpologiease. Inventing The University simply means the journey of each new individual member immersing themselves into the study of department culture or community of discourse, all while maintaining the appearance of having always being part of the community from the first day.

In the article Bartholomae gave examples of initial writings of certain students at their orientation. The first example is the one Bartholomae called “Clay Model.” Out of the three examples given, was the one person who recognized that his to charge ahead with writing in the style of what he had seen from the faculty he aspired to follow, even though he did not have the knowledge needed to fully express his thoughts, but he tried. In that expression of trying I found an approach to my future students. I do remember writing my first papers in or as close to the style of the Instructor, but Bartholomae’s lesson of the article is to understand my future students will be going through the same and in order to help them feel they belong to our community, I needed to recognize this in myself.

The second Bartholomae method, I can see easily taking right into practical application is “Describing a baseball to a Martian.” Not only do I want to put this into action with the tutoring students, but actually use this for myself. The suggestion was to take the pressure of writing to the Professor, relax and write “to his coy mistress, a senior in high school, or the Martian, ignorant of what is a baseball.” The method expresses “Exercises such as these allow students to imagine the needs and goals of the reader (Martian) and they bring the needs and goals up front as a dominant constraint in the construction of an essay.” Simply put, the instructor may have good knowledge of what a baseball and so the student writer scrambles to define the baseball as the instructor would. The Martian on the other hand, knows nothing about the ball or the game it is used in. The student writer can relax and teach the Martian from his knowledge of baseballs and the game.

Focusing on methods that advance the students like the Baseball/Martian or Inventing the University, help the student understand there are steps to be taken in order to communicate with your colleagues in your branch of study or arriving in the commonplace of the community.

Hello fellow 431 peeps, I am Louis Melton. To the Administration of C.S.U. Chico I am James L. Melton followed by a number, my instructors Louis, my Wife of 32years (Karen) Louie occasionally a choice 4 letter word, my 3 sons (Brandon 30, Shawn 28, and Josh 25) Dad, my Mom Louie, friends and associates mostly Louis or other facsimiles there of dependent on their sobriety, my 2 year old grandsons (Buddy and River) call me Papa/Poppy, and last but not least my Dad whom I recently lost called me Butch, which he started referring to the style of haircut he would get me a t Ray’s Barber shop in LA Puente, where I grew up, in Southern California east of L.A..

 

I had a long career in the Automotive Industry, from technician, Honda and Volvo Company rep, and ending with Service Manager/Adviser at two local dealerships. Two medical episodes have since taken me out of my career path, but ironically landed me back in school and I have come to realize on a path to what I was supposed to do in the first place; who I really am.

 

Wessenger’s article struck a chord with me, in the passage dealing with Intellectual context (pg11). Speaking of the value in apprenticeship, Wessenger gleaned from a book by Jean Lave. After gathering theory from a trade school in Arizona (A.A.I.), I thought I knew everything about car repair. It was only when I was placed with Hector Cantue, as an apprentice I learned how to repair cars. Using the theory I learned in Arizona, Hector patiently taught me how to put that theory into real world practical use. A term noted as “Legitimate Peripheral Participation.” At first I was offended, I worked hard to learn theory and I had received high grades. After Hectors efforts I realized its importance on rounding out my knowledge.