Singapore, are you not my country?

Provocation 4

This week's "4th Provocation" also pays tribute to Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive skills...

1) Description/Retrieval: Recall your educational experiences in secondary school, junior college, and/or the university. How would you describe the peer culture(s) that you felt most at home with outside the formal classroom? (I, for one, was happily trapped in my nerdy culture of pseudo-intellectual chess players obsessed with playing chess as part of our CCA. Ugh!!)

2) Analysis: To what extent did the culture(s) of learning in your Literature classroom in those days resonate with the peer and home cultures that you were most comfortable with? (Think, for example, about the cultural ways of speaking, interacting, writing, thinking, and feeling that were encouraged at home, among your peers, and in the formal classroom.)

3) Evaluation: How well did your Literature teacher relate the subject to your own and your classmates' socio-cultural worlds?

Readings
Heath, S. (2005) What no bedtime story means. In A. Duranti (ed.), Linguistic anthropology: A reader (pp. 318-342). Oxford: Blackwell.
Gutierrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19-25.

Provocation 3

This week's "3rd Provocation" pays tribute to Benjamin Bloom's taxonomy of cognitive skills...

1) Description/Retrieval: Recall your own experiences as students of English Literature (in secondary school, junior college, university). What were the most memorable pedagogical approaches, strategies, or techniques (it may just have been ONE) that your teacher(s) employed to help you learn?

2) Analysis: Which learning theories (behaviorist, humanist, social constructivist, sociocultural theories) were implicit in this/these pedagogical approach(es) and technique(s)? (Refer to Warren's Lecture 5 slides or your Ed Psych course readings for a summary of these educational theories.)

3) Evaluation: On hindsight, was/were this/these pedagogical approach(es) and technique(s) effective in helping you appreciate Literature? Why (not)?

Readings
Heath, S. (2005) What no bedtime story means. In A. Duranti (ed.), Linguistic anthropology: A reader (pp. 318-342). Oxford: Blackwell.
Gutierrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19-25.

Provocation 2

For this week’s e-discussion, I’m opening two free-for-all forums to start encouraging intergroup dialogue and solidarity. Enter this one or the other (or both, if you wish). But do two things first:

1) Read the book chapter by Michael Smith & Jeffrey Wilhelm (2010) titled “Teaching so it matters.” (This was referred to in Chin Ee’s lecture.)

2) Read the article by Alex Kendall (2008) titled “Playing and resisting: Rethinking young people’s reading cultures.” (This is the new reading that will be covered in Warren’s lecture next Monday.)

The aim of these readings is to provide you with a conceptual vocabulary and theoretical handle to grip and pry apart the rich ideas and experiences you’ve all been sharing. So once you’ve read them, start posting your responses to this provocation:

To what extent does MOE’s literature curriculum (including the lists of recommended texts for different streams and levels) betray the presence of “othering discourses” that see young adult readers as “‘passive,’ ‘uncritical’ consumers of ‘low-brow,’ ‘throw-away’ texts” (Kendall, 2008, p. 123)? Some of you, for instance, defended your choice of texts like Twilight by appealing to the general relevance of films and pop-cultural texts in our lives and the lives of our students. So why are literature teachers and curriculum planners resistant to the inclusion of such “alternative” genres? How might your views on this matter be informed by writers like Eagleton, Booth, and, for that matter, critical theory?

Provocation 1

For this week’s e-discussion, I’m opening two free-for-all forums to start encouraging intergroup dialogue and solidarity. Enter this one or the other (or both, if you wish). But do two things first:

1) Read the book chapter by Michael Smith & Jeffrey Wilhelm (2010) titled “Teaching so it matters.” (This was referred to in Chin Ee’s lecture.)

2) Read the article by Alex Kendall (2008) titled “Playing and resisting: Rethinking young people’s reading cultures.” (This is the new reading that will be covered in Warren’s lecture next Monday.)

The aim of these readings is to provide you with a conceptual vocabulary and theoretical handle to grip and pry apart the rich ideas and experiences you’ve all been sharing. So once you’ve read them, start posting your responses to this provocation:

Kendall (2008) argues that students’ reading choices are never value-free. A corollary to this is that teachers’ reading choices are inescapably value-laden. Looking at your own and others’ reading recommendations in last week’s online posts/discussion, ask yourself and each other:

What are your implicit criteria for selecting or valorizing certain texts in the literature classroom? TG2 mentioned, for instance, the criterion of “literary merit” on Monday, but “What makes a text literary?” and “What is Literature/literature” are the essential questions that we started with in our first week’s lecture and tutorial. For another example, I heard some of us talking about “age-appropriate” texts in terms of their moral-ethical themes, but what makes reading a literature text “ethical” whatever the presumed age of your readers? You may want to refer to (a) Terry Eagleton’s cultural materialist analysis in his introduction to Literary Theory (one of our readings in the first week) and (b) Wayne Booth’s liberal-humanist discussion of the ethical possibilities of literature pedagogy (also a reading from our first week) to clarify your thoughts on this issue. Think also about how different critical theories provide ways of complicating the ethical import of different texts (e.g., some “innocent” children’s stories can be made risky/risqué through psychoanalytic, feminist, and queer readings). Concomitantly, would the deliberate privileging of certain critical theories reflect a discriminatory "othering"approach to literary interpretation in the Singapore classroom?

TG1 & TG2: Creating dispositions of appreciation, understanding, criticality and creativity

Hi hi, this is not a compulsory blog post but follows from the lecture today. If you have any thoughts from today's lecture about how we can create the environment for encouraging these dispositions of appreciation, understanding, criticality and creativity, please share them. And any other thoughts springing from today's lecture.

TG1: Read a text of your choice. What are the problems with using this text in the literature classroom? What are the possibilities?

Readings

Purves, A. (1993) Towards a reevaluation of reader response and school literature. Language Arts, 70, 348-361.

Holden, P. (1999) The great literature debate: Why teach literature in Singapore. In Chua, S. H. & Chin, W. P. (1999) Localising pedagogy: teaching literature in Singapore (pp. 79-89). Singapore: NIE Press.

Harold Bloom’s list of the Western Canon. Retrieved from http://sonic.net/~rteeter/grtbloom.html

Poon, A. (2007) The politics of pragmatism: some issues in the teaching of literature in Singapore. Changing English, 14(1), 51-59.

MOE Syllabi’s Aims and Outcomes.

Other Reference Texts

Wee, W-L. (2010). Culture, the arts and the global city. In Terence Chong (Ed.), The management of success: Singapore revisited (pp. 489-403). Singapore: ISEA

Greene, M. (1995) Releasing the imagination. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (excerpts)

Sinfield, A. (1998) How to read The Merchant of Venice without being heterosexist. In Cole, M. (1998) The Merchant of Venice: Contemporary critical essays (pp. 161-180). London: Macmilliam Press

Eagleton, T. (2001) Literary theory: an introduction (2nd ed.). London: Blackwell Publishing.

TG2: Read a text of your choice. What are the problems with using this text in the literature classroom? What are the possibilities?

Readings

Purves, A. (1993) Towards a reevaluation of reader response and school literature. Language Arts, 70, 348-361.

Holden, P. (1999) The great literature debate: Why teach literature in Singapore. In Chua, S. H. & Chin, W. P. (1999) Localising pedagogy: teaching literature in Singapore (pp. 79-89). Singapore: NIE Press.

Harold Bloom’s list of the Western Canon. Retrieved from http://sonic.net/~rteeter/grtbloom.html

Poon, A. (2007) The politics of pragmatism: some issues in the teaching of literature in Singapore. Changing English, 14(1), 51-59.

MOE Syllabi’s Aims and Outcomes.

Other Reference Texts

Wee, W-L. (2010). Culture, the arts and the global city. In Terence Chong (Ed.), The management of success: Singapore revisited (pp. 489-403). Singapore: ISEA

Greene, M. (1995) Releasing the imagination. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (excerpts)

Sinfield, A. (1998) How to read The Merchant of Venice without being heterosexist. In Cole, M. (1998) The Merchant of Venice: Contemporary critical essays (pp. 161-180). London: Macmilliam Press

Eagleton, T. (2001) Literary theory: an introduction (2nd ed.). London: Blackwell Publishing.

TG2: How would your knowledge of literary theories and critical approaches be relevant to your work as a literature teacher?

Readings for Week 2:
Lynn, S. (2005) Critical worlds: a selective tour. In Lynn, S. (2005) Texts and contexts: writing about literature with critical theory (4th ed., 13-35). NY: Pearson.
Miller, L. (2001) Step-by-step guide to Practical Criticism. In Miller, L. (2001) Mastering Practical Criticism (pp. 77-96). London: Palgrave.
Liew, W.M. (1999) "Thy word is all": Différance in George Herbert's Christian hermeneutics. Literature and Belief: The Tradition of Metaphysical Poetry and Belief, 19,(1 & 2), 191-210.

List of critical interpretive approaches:

· New Criticism · Biographical & historical criticism  · New Historicism · Psychoanalytic theory/theories  · Deconstruction

· Marxist criticism · Postcolonial criticism · Feminist criticism · Queer theory · Ecocriticism

Sub-question (for tutorials): Which approaches would you authorize or valorize in your literature classroom? (Describe the context of your particular literature class.) Explain your pedagogical rationale.

TG1: How would your knowledge of literary theories and critical approaches be relevant to your work as a literature teacher?

Readings for Week 2:
Lynn, S. (2005) Critical worlds: a selective tour. In Lynn, S. (2005) Texts and contexts: writing about literature with critical theory (4th ed., 13-35). NY: Pearson.
Miller, L. (2001) Step-by-step guide to Practical Criticism. In Miller, L. (2001) Mastering Practical Criticism (pp. 77-96). London: Palgrave.
Liew, W.M. (1999) "Thy word is all": Différance in George Herbert's Christian hermeneutics. Literature and Belief: The Tradition of Metaphysical Poetry and Belief, 19,(1 & 2), 191-210.

List of critical interpretive approaches:

·                 New Criticism   ·                 Biographical & historical criticism   ·                 New Historicism ·                 Psychoanalytic theory/theories   ·                 Deconstruction

·                 Marxist criticism ·                 Postcolonial criticism ·                 Feminist criticism ·                 Queer theory ·                 Ecocriticism

Sub-question (for tutorials): Which approaches would you authorize or valorize in your literature classroom? (Describe the context of your particular literature class.) Explain your pedagogical rationale.