SGarza.QuestionFromCalebReBerlin History

Hide minor edits - Show changes to output - Cancel

Changed lines 4-8 from:
'''''Response from Krystal'''''
to:
'''''Response from Krystal'''''

I found article extremely interesting and enlightening! I teach the way I teach is like saying I am who I am. This article caused me to reflect on my ideology; I have often reflected on my pedagogy but never connected it to what I thought was possible or impossible, what I believe is good or bad, etc. (Reference to three questions on page 669.) I see that my is hard wired to my ideology of life, collective or not. Berlin reinforces this on page 682: pedagogy is imbricated in ideology, in a set of tacit assumptions about what is real, what is good, what is possible, and how power out to be distributed. It is difficult to, or rather I know how to, separate the two. You are absolutely spot on in your assessment that most classrooms operate on the basis of the teacher's preference. Literature is chosen based on preference. Classroom management is wholly personal preference.

However, that does not mean that teachers cannot broaden horizons by introducing multiple points of view and allowing the students to develop their own. As you stated, it seems a waste to only incorporate one methodology in the classroom. It is analogous to only teaching students one way to study vocabulary or one way to read a text or one way to take notes. Most teachers do teach multiple methods of rhetoric: academic, professional, and creative. However, based on teacher preference, one will be taught with greater emphasis.
Changed lines 1-4 from:
Berlin highlights the attributes that make up the different branches of rhetorical pedogogy and application, signing off by acknowledging his bias/preference for social/epistemic rhetoric as a pedogogical method. From what I have assessed through the readings this semester, as well as from the different questions posted every week, it seems apparent that most classrooms operate on the basis of the teacher's prefered rhetorical pedogogy; however, wouldn't this seem counterproductive? It is apparent that some rhetorical pedogogies focus on the ability to use rhetoric/language (such as expressive), while others call for questioning the social, political, and individual constructs of reality associated with rhetoric/language (such as social/epistemic rhetoric); yet it seems a waste to only incoporate one methdology in the classroom, as each division of rhetorical pedogoy has much to offer. After reading Berlin, I thought that it might be wiser to teach multple methods of rhetorical application to students which addresses academic, professional, and creative forms of writing and language application. While teaching the different forms of rhetorical usage, the ethics of how to use rhetoric could be mixed in, using different mediums to both teach how to apply certain forms of rhetoric, while simultaneously encouraging students to questions these rhetorical devices and applications, searching for bias and the appropriation of political and social power. Though I feel this could be an interesting way to teach rhetoric, sadly I don't know if a semester would provide sufficient time to appropriately address each concept. If anybody else has any ideas on how to combine these rhetorical pedogogies into a cohesive course, or thinks that this line of teaching is bound for failure, please share.
to:
Berlin highlights the attributes that make up the different branches of rhetorical pedogogy and application, signing off by acknowledging his bias/preference for social/epistemic rhetoric as a pedogogical method. From what I have assessed through the readings this semester, as well as from the different questions posted every week, it seems apparent that most classrooms operate on the basis of the teacher's prefered rhetorical pedogogy; however, wouldn't this seem counterproductive? It is apparent that some rhetorical pedogogies focus on the ability to use rhetoric/language (such as expressive), while others call for questioning the social, political, and individual constructs of reality associated with rhetoric/language (such as social/epistemic rhetoric); yet it seems a waste to only incoporate one methdology in the classroom, as each division of rhetorical pedogoy has much to offer. After reading Berlin, I thought that it might be wiser to teach multple methods of rhetorical application to students which addresses academic, professional, and creative forms of writing and language application. While teaching the different forms of rhetorical usage, the ethics of how to use rhetoric could be mixed in, using different mediums to both teach how to apply certain forms of rhetoric, while simultaneously encouraging students to questions these rhetorical devices and applications, searching for bias and the appropriation of political and social power. Though I feel this could be an interesting way to teach rhetoric, sadly I don't know if a semester would provide sufficient time to appropriately address each concept. If anybody else has any ideas on how to combine these rhetorical pedogogies into a cohesive course, or thinks that this line of teaching is bound for failure, please share.


'''''Response from Krystal'''''
Added line 1:
Berlin highlights the attributes that make up the different branches of rhetorical pedogogy and application, signing off by acknowledging his bias/preference for social/epistemic rhetoric as a pedogogical method. From what I have assessed through the readings this semester, as well as from the different questions posted every week, it seems apparent that most classrooms operate on the basis of the teacher's prefered rhetorical pedogogy; however, wouldn't this seem counterproductive? It is apparent that some rhetorical pedogogies focus on the ability to use rhetoric/language (such as expressive), while others call for questioning the social, political, and individual constructs of reality associated with rhetoric/language (such as social/epistemic rhetoric); yet it seems a waste to only incoporate one methdology in the classroom, as each division of rhetorical pedogoy has much to offer. After reading Berlin, I thought that it might be wiser to teach multple methods of rhetorical application to students which addresses academic, professional, and creative forms of writing and language application. While teaching the different forms of rhetorical usage, the ethics of how to use rhetoric could be mixed in, using different mediums to both teach how to apply certain forms of rhetoric, while simultaneously encouraging students to questions these rhetorical devices and applications, searching for bias and the appropriation of political and social power. Though I feel this could be an interesting way to teach rhetoric, sadly I don't know if a semester would provide sufficient time to appropriately address each concept. If anybody else has any ideas on how to combine these rhetorical pedogogies into a cohesive course, or thinks that this line of teaching is bound for failure, please share.