After addressing questions from the previous class meeting, discussion turned to concerns of audience analysis and understanding, working from examples to note how audiences might be successfully addressed. Class then treated various figurations of language before moving on to discuss upcoming assignments.
Class met as scheduled, beginning at 1800 US Central Time in a co-sat session focused on Room 105 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster listed 32 students, a decline of one from last week; ten attended on-site or live online. Student participation was quite good.
No students had attended the most recent office hour; the next office hour will be Monday, 25 March 2019, at 1800 US Central Time.
Students are reminded about the following upcoming assignments, due through Canvas before the end of day, US Central Time, on 24 March 2019:
Discussion Thread: Peer Review of the Self-Introduction Speech
On 9 January 2018, Christian Smith’s “Higher Education Is Drowning in BS” appeared in the online Chronicle of Higher Education. In the article, Smith rails against the various forms of bullshit that pervade contemporary academia; the piece lists a number of definitions of the term, some of which read as progressive, some of which read as reactionary. Smith identifies his own areas of privilege before continuing to inveigh against bullshit in academe and the effects on prevailing culture that he perceives as proceeding from that bullshit. He relates a disillusionment with the putative mission of academe against the systemic constraints upon it and the ultimate ineffectiveness of efforts to change them at local levels. Any change to come will likely be troubling for those who have to undergo it, Smith asserts, and, while he sees things as likely to resolve well, he anticipates having to deal with quite a bit of bullshit in the interim.
I found myself interested in the article for the scatological reason: it treats bullshit, and I have some pseudo-scholarly interest in the topic. Indeed, I’ve written on the subject in presented work and in one blog post or another. And I was not displeased to find the wide-ranging definition of bullshit Smith advances in the article; I do not necessarily agree with it, but I appreciate seeing the attempt to clarify the term further than Frankfurt, Hardcastle & Reisch, and Fredal have done–even if it is unsuccessful. (It is too grounded in the concrete examples provided, of which there are many, and does not move to extrapolate from them. It also does not make reference to the earlier works in what might be called taurascatology, which seems a lamentable lack from a senior scholar.)
I was not as happy to see the reactionary tenor of Smith’s argument, though, as he hammers away at the various issues he decries. Many of them read as the same kind of talking points reiterated by informational outlets towards which he himself directs ire for their putative corruption of the nobler aspects of American life. (Really, the only change is in the level of affected politeness in the things ostensibly abjured; they’ve always been done, they’ve just been done in nicer clothing and with more forks on the table previously than now–but more forks cost more money, and maximizing profit is the thing to do.) Again, it reads as something that a senior scholar ostensibly invested in the “higher” aspirations of traditional liberal arts curricula ought to take more care to avoid; it smacks to me of the kind of sloppy thinking being abjured in the article.
But what do I know? I’m one of the second-rate PhD students trained by mediocre graduate programs at third-tier universities whose expensive sports programs drain money away from academics, after all, and so far from worthy of commenting on such matters–or such is one of the implications I get from the article. After all, did I deserve it, I’d’ve gone to a top-ranked school with well funded programs that only admits the truly meritorious, right? Not the kind where the parents of uncaring students fraudulently pad resumes to ensure they get in. Because that’s not the kind of bullshit in which academe is smothered at all…
It has been not quite a year since I last worked on file destruction at my workplace, and I find myself at it again, thinking on it again. Last time, I noted that the task sat ill with me, the need to get rid of information conflicting with my scholar’s attitude towards understanding, my medievalist’s lament at how little we know because of how much we have lost. And I am not unmindful of the associations between fascist and other, similarly oppressive systems and the destruction of knowledge–and I do not want to be associated therewith any more than I necessarily am because of the positions of privilege I occupy. But I am also mindful of the rights of the penitent to be forgiven, of those who have grown to have at least some of their earlier days forgotten–for I am still mindful that I have done things I would rather not have remembered, even if I seem unable to forget them.
I still feel some unease at the task, to be sure. But perhaps I have done it enough that it is not such a shock, anymore. And perhaps my own increasing removal from academe is helping matters; I am less sentimental about the cultures of knowledge creation and knowledge retention now than I was before. I would like to think that I more carefully curate what I keep, though it is likely more a matter of my being less apt to acquire things now than I was before than of my being more selective about keeping the things I do acquire–and with the records of my workplace, while I recall that they are testimonies of human experience, they are not mine to keep or discard. All I can do, all I should do, is follow the guidelines of my institution with respect to them, and consign to destruction those records that have passed our retention policy.
I cannot help but glance at a few as I do, though, and I wonder about those who are my age or near to it, those who have names I dimly remember from years gone by, when I was young and thought the world was. I wonder about one man, already old when he entered our records, likely dead now; is he remembered elsewhere, or is my destruction of his client file the elimination of one of the last memories held of him? I know that way lies madness, though; I know that to hold onto things for thought that they are the last comments on one person or another means that nothing can be allowed to pass away, but there are things that ought to be allowed to die.
Immortality is a greater burden to bear than any ought to be asked to shoulder. I content myself with the thought that I am sparing some from it.
After addressing questions from the previous class meeting, discussion turned to concerns of the communication environment and various patterns of argumentation. Reminders about upcoming work followed, and time to practice impromptu speeches and to work on assignments was offered.
Class met as scheduled, beginning at 1800 US Central Time in a co-sat session focused on Room 105 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster listed 33 students, a decline of one from last week; nine attended on-site or live online. Student participation was reasonably good.
One student had attended the most recent office hour; the next office hour will be Monday, 18 March 2019, at 1800 US Central Time.
Students are reminded about the following upcoming assignments, due through Canvas before the end of day, US Central Time, on 17 March 2019:
Discussion Thread: Preparing for the First Speech
Reflection on the Self-Introduction Speech (as a Word document)
I have made more than one post speaking to my old nerdy habit of playing tabletop roleplaying games (RPGs), as well as posts regarding my thoughts about designing them. As to the latter, I find myself taking a fair bit of inspiration from Rich Burlew’s The New World series, hosted on Giant in the Playground; I’ve discussed the series elsewhere, as well. In that spirit, then, and working from materials I’ve posted in other places, I offer what appears below.
Having noted before that my attempts to develop an RPG worked from sixes, and knowing that one of the things that people tend to do is try to explain the machinations of their observable universe in terms they can understand–usually gods and the like until observational technology allows for other ideas to take firmer hold–it makes sense to me that any RPG milieu in which I might work would offer religious ideas. And since RPGs admit of things that do not necessarily occur in the “real” world, those religious ideas might even have some in-milieu truth to them. That said, I am not necessarily convinced by religious ideologies, myself, and even if I might compose what I call a series of hymns in another webspace, it is not as an act of worship that I do it.
The idea of an anti-worship, though, of a religion that abjures the influence of the gods, is an interesting one. (I admit to being inspired in part by an episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine, as well.) If I follow that idea, then, and the earlier materials I’d glossed, then I would seem to need six gods to steer away from whatever people I might focus upon for the RPG milieu. The Stupid God is one against which I have inveighed at length already in what may someday be a collection of verse I would release for publication. (It might be nice to earn a bit of money in such a way.) Such a god, one that revels in and promulgates folly, would seem to be one to abjure, one to send away from the self and towards opposition. The Angry God, which I have also mentioned in other writing I’ve done, would seem to be another; there are certainly things about which to be angry, and there are benefits to being angry at times, but I’ve had a lot of anger in me for far longer than ought to have been the case, and I have not benefited from it.
Those are only two, though, and I do not know that both should be shunned as such; I have no reservations about condemning the Stupid God, for reasons I hope would be obvious, but, again, there are times anger is merited, and the god of such a thing would be useful to have on hand at such times. What to do with the others is not yet clear to me, but it is good to have some idea of how to proceed, of what slots to fill–and there is always room for things to change and grow.
May the Stupid God not claim too much of that room!
Continuing a practice I most recently iterated at the end of the November 2018 session at DeVry University, and following closely the patterns established in previous practice, comments below offer impressions of class performance among students enrolled in my section of ENGL 062: Introduction to Reading and Writing during the January 2019 session at that institution. After a brief outline of the course and selected statistics about it, impressions and implications for further teaching are discussed.
Students enrolled in ENGL 062 during the January 2019 session were asked to complete a number of assignments in quick succession. Many, and the weightiest, were weekly written assignments leading to several short works; others included a series of quizzes and reading activities, as well as ongoing online discussion. Those assignments and their prescribed point-values are below, with relative weights shown in the figure below:
Homework assignments were assessed by means of rubrics provided by the institution. Discussion was assessed through an instructor-developed rubric. Quizzes and reading exercises were assessed as standardized testing conducted as part of University-wide course requirements.
The section met in Room 114 at the San Antonio Metro Campus on Mondays at 6pm, US Central Time, with online office hours generally being held Thursdays at 6pm, US Central Time. Specific grade data, as well as attendance data, are not being reported due to the small size of the class; there are not enough students for their information to be presented in aggregate.
I note that attrition seems to have affected the section. No student attended all class meetings, and assignments were not submitted that should have been. Given the small size of the class, however, I do not know how representative the results can be taken to be. I am not pleased with them, however, so I shall have to look for ways to do better in succeeding sessions–and I am already being assigned to teach more.
For the first class meeting of the session, discussion gave a basic introduction to the course before reviewing the course syllabus and relevant policies. Class then turned to an aggregate activity: designing a rubric to apply to speeches. Reminders about upcoming work followed.
Class met as scheduled, beginning at 1800 in a co-sat session focused on Room 105 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster listed 34 students; eight attended on-site or live online. Student participation was reasonably good.
An online office hour was held at 1800 on Monday, 4 March 2019. No students attended. The next is scheduled for 1800 on Monday, 11 March 2019.
Students are reminded about the following upcoming assignments, due through Canvas before the end of day, US Central Time, on 10 March 2019:
Discussion Threads: Course Introductions and Preparing for the Session
Communication Anxiety Report and Analysis (submit as an APA-formatted Word document)
There was a time in my life that I did a fair bit of traveling. I used to go back and forth across states, both for social and for professional reasons, visiting friends and giving conference papers at various scholarly gatherings. After moving back to Texas, however, I grew much more sedentary, staying at home more and going other places–both in town and out of town–less. This has been partly because my family has needed me to be home, but part has also been that I do not need to go places as much. I do not conference as I used to do, and the friends I used to go galavanting across states to see are too far away for me to visit often or at all.
The recent trip to Raleigh reminded me of the change. My flights went well enough on the way up, though I was vaguely ill at ease with the now-unfamiliar motion of commercial aircraft, and my ears did not appreciate the descents from the heavens. I was able to sleep on one flight, though not the other, and it might’ve been nice to do so. I did do better at settling into my room than used to be the case for me, too, laying out what needed it before resting a little bit (and even then remaining active; writing soothes me).
Perhaps it is the years and the changes in my life that have made me better at this than I used to be. It’s certainly not recent practice; I’ve not traveled since last May (though I’ll be going again this May, too). But it is good to be reminded that I can do such things at need, and it might be better to know that I can actually enjoy myself a bit along the way.
As this post emerges into that part of the internet where it is easily seen, I will be on my way to attend the wedding of my second-best friend from graduate school. (I attended the wedding of my best friend from graduate school several years ago now–sensibly, since it was also my wedding.) It’s been a while since I’ve been to a wedding, to be sure, and I find myself thinking about what such the institution marked by such ceremonies continue to mean. It seems a fitting thing to write about now.
I don’t know how my friend’s marriage will go, although I expect it will go reasonably well or better. But I do know how mine has gone so far (“so far” because I am not done with it yet–and do not mean to be anytime soon), which is to say pretty well. My wife and I argue, certainly, and sometimes over stupid things. And there are times we get onto one another’s nerves, to be sure. I’ll not elucidate details; it suffices to note that there are such circumstances.
But though the annoyances and vexations are, they matter little against the many benefits I derive from being married. One of the chief among them is that, like our daughter, my wife inspires me to be a better person. I love her, so I want her to be happy and supported, and learning how to help her be happy and ensure she is supported has helped me to be less of the selfish git I have been too much conditioned to be. And I have taken specific, concrete steps to be a better source of happiness and support for her; if it is the case that my changes have not been speedy in all cases (though there have been a few that have been pretty quick), I can at least point to progress in them as I continue to try to make more of it. She deserves to have me at my best, after all, so it behooves me to be that best as much as I can.
I know that not all marriages are such. I see enough of them fragmenting or standing not stably but stultifyingly; my line of work being what it is shows me many such. I know that not all spouses support one another, that not all spouses look to one another partly as muses from whom to draw inspiration, as friends, as lovers, as confidants; I know that many look to marriage as exploitation. And there are ways in which it is and remains so, given the social structures from which the institution as typically expressed in the United States through the past several decades emerges and into which it feeds. Even mine, in which I work to give more to it than I take from it, has such overtones; I do not know how or if they can be fully escaped.
I know, though, that marriage can be a fulfilling thing, if it is made to be. I hope that my friend will find his own marriage such in the days, months, and years to come. And I look forward to the continued work of making my own marriage such a thing.
For the final class meeting of the session, there would have a brief reminder of an administrative note from last week before a short question-and-answer period. The remainder of class time would have been given to student work on the week’s written assignment, a reflective and planning postscript.
The class met as scheduled, at 1800 in Room 114 of the San Antonio campus. The course roster showed three students enrolled, unchanged from last week. None attended.
The office hour that would normally be held on 28 February 2019 is cancelled.
Students are reminded that the postscript is due before the end of day Saturday, 2 March 2019. The session closes at that time, so no work can be accepted afterwards.
Reflective comments on the session are forthcoming.