 |
| Urs Fisher Challenging the ideas of surface |
With teaching writing one couldn't follow the principles of a maths or science based course, these fields demands accurate, erudite knowledge, particular in engineering and medicine, and even the non-maths based law course.
Tutors teach by means of selecting singular students and opening with a question that the students has to answer to the fullest of their ability, and then the teacher carries out follow up questions. This line of enquiry expires when the tutor is satisfied. These techniques would be a disservice when operating in the field of the arts.
As I am three years in to my own course it has become visibly clear that a creative could not, or should not, have this kind of technique applied as most areas of discussion are subjective and dependent upon who's viewing or reading them. And so nothing is black nor white. Furthermore, practises vary too, there is no standard a writer can abide by, it's a personal craft dependent and unique to whom is creating it. Some people micro manage, others plan everything out in full detail on post-it notes all over their walls before they even start a sentence.
I do think the current system we have encountered of group-based work is the best structure for teaching writing, however, I think I would have the teacher interject further and prop up workshopping with particular elements students should pay attention to, like sentence construction, word choice, metaphors, how one achieves their voice. I think these techniques need to have a better understanding and focus in teaching.
--ST
Great! Why do you think the teacher needs to interject more? Do you think the teacher's thoughts on the piece of work being 'workshopped' are more 'valuable' than peer feedback? Why? If not, then what role is the teacher actually playing in the workshop?
ReplyDeleteMore valuable in the sense that they can set an early precedent of tone and incisiveness when delivering feedback. If the teacher is exacting with their thoughts on a piece and does not shy away from telling hard truths then it will encourage students to become more forthright with their own critiquing, improving the quality of feedback overall. As it stands, because of a teacher's initial 'hands-off' approach students are left unsure with their own ideas and how to convey them to eachother, worried about stepping on eachothers toes. Furthermore, there is a distinct lack of encouragement when a student does convey their ideas and analysis. Typically a lecturer or tutor are happy to further or change a student's statement rather than show appreciation for their contribution. I understand the act of furthering their ideas is an indirect way of showing appreciation however those who are hands-off deteriorate the feedback as they do not reinforce the point with their experience nor pay the student credence for saying something of worth. Tutors must be more forthcoming with praise, as unusual as it sounds when dealing with adults at university, but I have found an employer would more ready to praise than some tutors, it builds confidence and esteem in what they are saying.
ReplyDelete