The reality of Myth

As a perspective teacher, there were a few things I took from our Myth presentations/website creations.

First, I think both the presentations and the websites are great tools to get kids involved and interested in any lesson plan or subject matter. I really think that kids would love to make a website on a topic instead of doing some sort of written book report. I'm sure everyone can agree, making a website didn't really feel like work, and when you can get students to learn while having fun, you've won the battle.

As far as the presentations are concerned, it seemed that everyone's groups provided engaging activities for their students to participate in, which again, made the time go faster, and allowed us to learn something along the way. The only thing one needs to really be aware of, on the teaching end, is organization. I could see the group work getting off task occasionally, and if this is going to happen with a handful of student teachers, you know that it will definitely be an issue in elementary or high school settings.

Lastly, a comment about our myth section in general. I personally find the term "Myth" to be problematic because myth implies or assumes "fake." Now, I'm not really a practitioner of anything presented in our myth and knowing book, but I have no doubt that there are people out there that take some of the "myths" very seriously, particularly when it comes down to some of the Native American teachings.

Basically what I think is this: One could easily lump any of the major world religions into our Myth and Knowing text. They have the same purpose (finding greater meaning in our lives) and often have the same proof or evidence to back them up (hearsay, ancient texts, but little tangible evidence). This observation is not meant to belittle the religions of the world, but to add an importance to some of the ideas presented in our readings that were labeled "Myths" and seemingly given an air of triviality because of it. Just because these ideas are not prevelant today, does not mean they should be taken lightly.

I guess I would just urge people to stress the importance of these ideas to their students when teaching these subjects. After all, who knows? In another 1000 years, people may be teaching our current world religions as myth and legend.

Poetry: Creation and Interpretation

After extensively anaylising a poem in a critical essay for our first assignment and then writing a few poems for our second, it seems to me that the largest difference between the two come in the interpretation of meaning in one and the creation of meaning in the other.

For our essays, we were fortunate enough to critique works that were already deemed "classics," making our interpretation of them easy due to the large amounts of critical writings on the works at our dispossal. Sure we can assign our own meaning (and I definitely feel that it is very important to do so), but really, who can argue with years and years of prior criticism and analysis?

As far as actually composing poetry goes, the meaning is left solely up to us to create. The poems can mean whatever we like, and then on the flip side, our audiences have much more freedom of interpretation since none of us are established authors. The reader can then decipher our poetry in any way they see fit. However, with this authorial freedom, comes the burden of creating poetry that actually speaks to the audience in a way that we intended. Of course, there is always wiggle room for interpretation, but if I would write a poem about oranges, and everyone in our class interpreted it as a poem about apples, then I as an author am confronted with a predicament. I may have written a beautiful poem, but if my audience interprets it different than my intentions or creative passions, then I may have to go back and re-work it.

Media technology should stay out of the classroom!

Howdy.  

My name is Art.  I'm a freelance film/video writer and director who has not been getting much work lately, so I've begun my back-up plan which brings me here to CSUN.  Currently I'm taking the necessary classes in order to get an english single subject waiver.

So I don't think media technology should be completely abolished from the classroom, but there is a part of me that thinks the current trend to integrate is going a bit too far, so I thought I would play the devil's advocate.   Here are some reasons:

1.  There are always technological hiccups.  I know that our class is meant to fix this problem to a certain extent, but I've never been in a classroom where there were not problems getting the technology to work.  Whether it is the professor who has been utilizing the classroom for years, or the new student who has decided to do a powerpoint slideshow to spruce up their presentation, there are just too many x-factors involved because of the wide range of equipment and just from human error.  Delays and crashes seem inevitable.

2.  Speaking of powerpoint presentations to spruce up a discussion or lecture, can anyone give me an example of a time where that was actually the case?  Powerpoint to me is the muzak of presentations.  It's a way to put a sugar coating on what may be deemed to some to be dry material.  However, powerpoint is not the answer.  Adding some soft jazz music and pretty pictures of waterfalls will not get your audience involved, the speaker/lecturer is the one who should do that.  Instead of wasting time on google trying to find video re-enactments of your subject matter, maybe lecturers should work on their oratory skills.

3.  My last point (or argument, I guess)  is that maybe we don't need technology in the classroom whatsoever.  In fact, maybe the classroom should serve as a respite, a sanctuary that embraces the ideas of conversation and storytelling without 21st century technological devices. Don't these kids get inundated with constant digital stimulus outside of the classroom?  From the very moment class is dismissed the ipods go on and the text messaging begins.  I would argue in order to develop  these adolescents into well rounded adults it is important to keep the technological aids to a minimum so that they might begin to embrace the merits of good old fashioned listening and discussion.

So those are my thoughts.  Do you agree or disagree?  Please let me know.

Thanks,

Art