Appleman Chapter 4

This was an interesting chapter for me to encounter because I was previously unfamiliar with Marxist theory and what it entailed. Like some of the other historically and politically focused theories, Marxist theory tends to highlight the prevailing ideologies of the author's political and historical climate. Viewing a text through a Marxist lens means understanding the significance of socially constructed ideologies and beliefs found within the author, the texts, and the audience. I liked the example of the gravediggers in Hamlet being more culturally aware than the rest of the characters even though they were supposed to be the "lowest" members of society. I think that it is important for students to recognize the existence of class lines, however and wherever they may be drawn. Marxism is a theory that is "political... interrogate[s] textual features with considerations of power and oppression... invite[s] us to consider the kinds of prevailing ideologies that help construct the social realities in which we participate (or sometimes become unwitting participants)" (page 58). One thing in this chapter that I didn't particularly agree with was Appleman's reasons for using Marxism in the classroom today. Although I do believe that we should expose our students to this theory, especially in today's growing use of progressive classroom teaching strategies, I feel like I have to disagree that a reason why we should use it now is because of the changing nature of our students. Appleman argues on page 59 that the "increasing diversity of our students, even in primarily White suburban school districts, underscores our need to integrate cultural criticism into our literary study." The diversity of our student population is (hopefully) increasing, but Jonathan Kozol argues in his work Shame of the Nation that public schools today are more segregated than even post-apartheid America. If this is indeed true, it is a sad indication of the state of our public schooling climate, and something that needs to be earnestly addressed. At any rate, I still believe that Appleman is right in promoting an atmosphere that encourages the use of such theories such as Marxism in our secondary English classrooms.

Webb Chapter 5

One element of chapter 5 in Literature and Lives that I found to be interesting was Webb's belief that our ideas about Shakespeare (and decidedly most of the British and World literature authors that we tend to focus on in English classrooms) are tainted by the historical tilt that western powers have placed upon the rest of the world. The ways in which high school students in America tend to decipher Shakespeare are significantly more idealized and lofty than how he would be read if the truth about his environment and the culture he lived within were revealed. The average student views Shakespeare as this untouchable author who found a way to gather insightful truths about the world we live in (which, of course, is how we can still get so much meaningful interpretations from reading his works), but the truth the we find in history casts many shadows on this idyllic representation. In actuality Shakespeare's time was alive with political reform and cultural unrest. The two literary theories that Webb explores in this chapter, New Historicism and Postcolonial Studies, attempt to shed light on literary texts by examining them through a lens that focuses on current and noncurrent political, social, and cultural movements, philosophies, and ideas. Rather than concentrating on one moment in time, NH likes to interpret texts using historically significant ideas from the entire history of humankind. PS approaches literature with a firm grasp on the idea that the "first world" countries have shaped the way in which the world has developed over time and also how those countries have influenced the development of "third world" countries. I find this second theory to be especially intriguing because I've never really thought about how the western world has had such an incredible impact on the way that the world has developed. I definitely think that a lot of students could gain something by learning and utilizing these theories in their literature studies.

Webb Chapter 1

This first chapter of Allen Webb's book does a good job of showing his audience exactly why he embraces the literary theories that he does, particularly Reader Response and Cultural Studies theories. I liked his personal experience of bringing Mrs. Golden, and Auschwitz survivor, into his classroom in order to help his students better recognize a connection between the literature that they were reading for class and the lived experiences of real people. I didn't find it surprising at all that his students really seemed to get into it when he brought Mrs. Golden into his class because I feel like allowing them to make those specific connections brings them closer to the text and, therefore, closer to an understanding of the text's "meaning" (as subjective as that may be). On page 6 Webb says, "the experimentation I was doing in [my] classes made it plain that all students, and especially those struggling in school, needed to discover that everyone, even the most persecuted or oppressed, has a voice that can and should be heard and respected." This idea is crucial for students to understand in light of the RR and CS theories that he promotes in this chapter because a significant part of both those theories is the importance of personal experience and cultural experience of the reader in transaction with the text. Another thing that I found interesting about the CS theory in particular was his acknowledgement that the limitations of RR are the strengths of CS. Before reading this chapter I never even knew that a CS theory existed, and now that I do, I honestly think that it is one of my favorites. Using a CS approach to literature sounds more appealing to me than using your typical RR approach because it embraces the elements that could have a negative impact in RR. As Webb states, a cultural studies approach to literature text, "urges us to be self-reflexive but not cavalier about the disciplines we work in. While mixing genres and crossing boundaries, cultural studies spurs us also to consider how the establishment of genres and disciplines has functioned historically" (page 8).

MCTE

I will start off this post by saying that there are several things I found to be beneficial concerning the MCTE. My personal opinion of the conference, however, was not a particularly favorable one. I'll start with what I disliked... When we first arrived we filled out a half sheet of paper that was our "registration form" (if you can call it that) which contained several errors and typos. In all honesty, this isn't that important to the quality of the conference, but I would have expected better from a council of English teachers. Secondly, the first session that I attended was about new classroom teachers, their experiences, their strategies, and their setbacks. It sounded helpful to me and I decided to go only to find out that there was no panel (not even one beginning teacher) and almost all of the information we were given was either obvious, negative, or both. I felt cheated, like I had wasted one of my draft picks on a player who wouldn't even take the field. Finally, another session that really disappointed me was the one on digital storytelling. I hesitated in my decision to go to this session at all because I am pretty experienced with digital storytelling already and I enjoy creating and editing my own movies in my spare time so I wasn't sure if they could teach me anything new, but I figured that perhaps they would have some good ideas about incorporating digital stories into the secondary English classroom. I felt bad for the presenters when their demonstration fell apart at the seams (although a conference room full of English teachers is probably one of the more forgiving audiences that you could hope for), because their technology, which the presentation relied heavily on, failed to work. We barely even got to see an example of a digital story until the very end of the session when we got a brief 15 second clip. Despite all this, I enjoyed the opening speech and felt as though the keynote speaker was very well prepared, engaged, and knowledgeable about her subject of technology use in the classroom. She actually made me chuckle a few times which is quite an accomplishment given the early time of day that it was. Overall, I do feel as though it was a beneficial experience for me to attend this conference, but it wasn't a particularly enjoyable one.

Appleman Chapter 3

Chapter 3 of Appleman's book finally delves a little deeper into her ideas about literary theory instruction in the classroom, particularly that of Reader Response theory. Before reading this chapter my personal opinions about RR were quite positive. As I read the chapter I came to a sort of acceptance of the idea that I only liked RR because that is what I had primarily been taught throughout my high school English classes, but that doesn't totally negate my personal opinion that RR is an overall positive experience (in most cases) for both the students and the teacher. One of my most trusted beliefs is that the student needs to KNOW, without a doubt, that their personal opinions and ideas matter to the classroom environment and that they are always significant to our discussions. I know that in my own personal experience, the classes in which I felt the my opinion actually mattered were the classes that I liked the best, and as a direct result of that, the classes that I gained the most from. I found it interesting to read about the potential negative effects of using RR in the classroom because I had never really thought that it could have a negative impact. Despite my previous notion, I do agree now that RR could put some students in an awkward position (by being afraid to share, or sharing too much as Appleman mentions), and could even put the teacher in a precarious position by giving the students too much "power." I'm not sure that "too much 'power'" is the best way to describe this idea, but what I mean is that the students now have the ability to say, "well, if my response and interpretation are uniquely mine, then what could you (the teacher) possibly tell me about it?" These would obviously be difficult situations but I feel like the classroom has the potential to drive itself to those unusual places every once in a while no matter what or how you teach. Finally, I especially enjoyed the activity with the ambiguous poem that had students read and individually interpret its meaning. I think it is important to get the students thinking about how many perspectives could possibly be taken from any and all pieces of literary text. As this chapter points out, students often know what their doing while they interpret a text (like applying their personal experiences) but too few times do they know why they're doing that and even fewer times are they told other ways to do that. We need to keep them better informed and do a better job of letting them "see behind the curtain."

Appleman Chapter 2

Chapter 2 of Critical Encounters was another mild disappointment. In this chapter the author tries to demonstrate the effectiveness of literary theory in practice within the classroom by giving us four short vignettes of different classroom settings and literary theory applications within those classrooms. Appleman accomplishes what she intended with this chapter - showing her readers examples of how literary theories can improve the English classroom climate - I am just skeptical on the importance of vignettes. I have never really appreciated personal experience stories as much as some other people seem to, so that probably influenced my opinion of the chapter to a certain degree. It was, I'll admit, annoying interesting to read about the "Star Wars" activity. My nickname (please don't spread this secret too far) is 'Yoda' and I'm admittedly one of the biggest "Star Wars" dorks you'll ever encounter. For this reason I was slightly more interested in that particular vignette than the other ones. I know that we all tend to scoff at the idea of showing a movie several days in a row in an English classroom (especially an advanced English classroom) but I would argue that watching any popular movie and allowing the students to analyze that movie through the lens of a particular literary theory (especially if your activities are as prepared as the one Appleman provides) could help them to realize the impact that viewing a story through different theories can have on your interpretation of that story. One benefit that film has over paper is its ability to tell a larger group of people the same story in a decidedly shorter amount of time. Since all of the students are guaranteed to have seen the same story, you can better explore the various interpretive conclusions that they came to. The point is to invite many literary theories into your classroom so that students will "[n]o longer... respond within a preselected theoretical paradigm. They [will] construct the theoretical context as well as the content of their meaning making" (page 21).

Appleman Chapter 1

This opening chapter of Deborah Appleman's book does little more than lay out the game plan for the rest of the text. Her main goal seems to be to get practicing and future teachers to reconsider how schools were made and determine what changes need to be made in order to better facilitate student learning. She argues that literary theory, in all of its many forms, can have a drastic affect on the ways in which our schools today (at least the English classrooms) are run, if they were only used to their full potential. The author tells us on page 2 that "[t]he guiding assumption of [this] book is that the direct teaching of literary theory in secondary English classes will better prepare adolescent readers to respond reflectively and analytically to literary texts, both 'canonical' and multicultural. The book argues that contemporary literary theory provides a useful way for all students to read and interpret not only literary texts but their lives - both in and out of school. In its own way, reading with theory is a radical educational reform!" My assumption after this introductory chapter is that the bulk of the book will be spent focused on different literary theories and how they can be applied in a useful and meaningful way in the classroom. I am a little apprehensive right now because I feel like, at least in this first chapter, the quotations she used did a better job of explaining her ideas then her own writing. I feel like she didn't really add very much of her own insight. I did like, however, the lens analogy in describing the importance of viewing literary texts from multiple perspectives in order to discover multiple interpretations. I strongly agree with Kathleen McCormick's comment on page 8 that "readers [students] can begin to see themselves as interdiscursive subjects, to see texts as always 'in use,' and to recognize that different ways of reading texts have consequence."