Class notes:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ceTQg6PZh3IPKqfmVXkmgaeCUUEBpOzRKk1w13bgE9Y/edit
I felt a little tired jotting down my reflective summary from the previous session, especially since a lot of the points had to be repeated from the classroom notes. I realise I can play around with the format of writing and summarising a little bit. Since the class notes will already convey what I’m broadly doing in the session, the blog post can begin directly with the reflection. If anyone wants to know what I did in the session, do go through the notes--although, to be honest, it doesn’t always go exaaaaactly as planned.
Anyway. Here are some thoughts and feelings:
I started the session by addressing a few ‘practical’ concerns (anxiety, distractedness, screen exhaustion) that had been brought up through the writing exercise in the previous session. I felt an odd discomfort while doing this, especially using the word ‘practical’ (as distinct from the philosophical or theoretical?), given how each of these issues is linked to our psychological patterns, existential ruminations, and notions of self. One can’t merely resolve writing anxiety by taking breaks or sharing it with someone else (although one could learn to manage it better)--it requires a much more complex process to think through anxiety as a psychosomatic condition. I don’t know, I do believe in the usefulness of what I said, but I also remain dissatisfied.
I think I might have equated the words ‘syllabus’ and ‘curriculum’ at times. While the concept of ‘hidden curriculum’ helps question the construction of the syllabus itself (in terms of its representational choices as well as how it is pedagogically negotiated) but there is an important conceptual difference between the two terms. The syllabus would primarily refer to the document used to organise the sequence and the learning materials of the course; the curriculum would refer to a range of learning material, experiences, conversations, value-systems, and assessment practices shaping the production of the course. Curriculum is a far more expansive concept yet more useful for analysis: it helps put the ‘syllabus’ in relation with various institutional and social practices.
The conversation on how knowledge in various disciplinary curricula orient students in particular directions was useful. We discussed how the inclusion of certain topics in a curriculum influences interest in that field; or contrarily, could appear irrelevant if it is disconnected from lived experience. I wanted to reinforce the idea that the knowledge in a curriculum is necessarily selective (so it’s important to think about how and why certain knowledges are chosen and represented) and that it is also necessarily negotiated (through teacher and student interest). One idea I missed out on is the material implication of how curriculum orients interest, desire and knowledge: for example, how mainstream engineering curriculum frequently orients one into the work-and-be-successful-in-IT template; or how mainstream economics might normalise various kinds of labour exploitation inherent in many life and work choices. Questioning the curriculum is also about questioning how one lives and works.
The summary exercise is always interesting to me because it gives me a sense of how students are organising knowledge in their minds, especially with regard to ideas they disagree with. There were many issues to nitpick: insufficient nuance, detail, and demonstration in how various categories of knowledge are formulated and presented. However, there is a grey area that I did not go into: what do we do when strong experiential conviction shapes our disagreement? By attempting to ‘objectively’ define the idea we disagree with, are we somewhat trying to redeem the idea as legitimate complex knowledge (that we should not merely caricature to dismiss)? Is that always ethically and politically desirable? Of course, reality is complex, and our attempt to understand even the vilest, awful-est ideas must involve analytic consideration of how multi-layered they might be, but...does that have implications for one’s moral attitude towards the idea itself? When I suggested the exercise, I did not imply a value-neutral approach to summarising. I was trying to say that when you are summarising what you disagree with, you might end up realising that the disagreement is rooted in a false or insufficient construction of the idea; or that you learn how to disagree more effectively, in a way that is able to dismantle the idea by vividly exposing its limitations. This is something to think about in future sessions.
I particularly enjoyed demonstrating the literacy narrative exercise and listening to all the responses. I wanted to reinforce the point that experiential accounting is necessary to produce multi-layered understandings of educational contexts. People talked about experiences involving: a) how boys reacted oddly to a menstrual hygiene workshop in school that only girls had to participate in b) how friendship with boys was frowned upon or discouraged by teachers and the social milieu in certain social contexts c) how the impulse to ‘joke’ is rooted in problematic social and moral assumptions d) how male teachers would single out and hit boys in school e) and how societal biases teachers hold influence how students look at themselves. All of these stories were rooted in personal experiences, and there was further conversation on some of the questions and concerns that could be explored through these experiences/stories. I can’t wait to get to November to begin the literacy narrative process--for me, it's the most emotionally engaging part of the first semester.
The final section of the session was interesting--I wanted to have a discussion on collective guidelines we can begin developing for the course. It's never 'collective' in a genuine sense, but let us try and fail and critique and try again right? There are no pre-determined ways to negotiate the curriculum--we have to try and see what happens. At some point, I asked why people kept videos switched off, and apart from internet issues, some mentioned reasons such as having a bad hair day, or slouching, or eating. I said nooooo feel comfortable it’s okaaaaay. :P It should be okay ideally. No? Getting comfortable together is something I anticipate but also feel sad about the obstacles currently deterring progress. Hope we can get back to the physical classroom soon. Sigh. But it was a nice process, being honest with each other, sharing vulnerabilities, getting to know each other a little better. The journey continues. :)
Comments
Post a Comment