These tutorials might be useful for your task:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUD0iKBkCVo&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO-KYuC85sk&NR=1
Monday, 29 November 2010
Thinking about criticism...
Analizing the discussion we were having last class about peer review, I think that one of the reasons we have not been actively peer-reviewing other's texts is because we are too afraid to offend our classmates with any bad comment. To criticize, from my point of view, is really difficult; you have to take into account people's feelings and the way you are going to critique them without hurting or discouraging them. Considering this, you have to be a critical reader and part psychologist at the same time, being the latter is a harder work for most of us.
According to wikipipedia, -it might not be the best source- "Criticism is the judgement of the merits and faults of the work or actions of one individual by another (the critic). To criticise does not necessarily imply to find fault, but the word is often taken to mean the simple expression of prejudice or disapproval". I actually like this definition because it shows the two perspectives of the issue, which means that criticize is not only giving validation to somebody else's work, but also recognizing the weakness of it.
In this sense, I agree with those who think that saying always good things is going to help; it might be encouraging for people if they hear: "I'm really impressed by your text!", or "You did a great job!", or "Keep working like this, never change!", -or whatever other praising phrases we make up-. But at the same time, I strongly believe that pointing out the good things is not going to help at all to improve the bad or weak ones. For me, pointing out the faults, not only the merits, would be more productive to the improvement of our writing process or, more general, our learning process.
The problem I've faced by thinking this way, is that I focus too much my attention in the things that I don't like -even recognizing the good things- and I say what I really think about it without taking the psychologist position, being sometimes too honest and hard on them. With this strategy, I've found that people do not want to be told any unpleasant or disapproval comment and some of them take it as a personal attack. One of two things is happening: we are so reluctant to critique that we don't even know how to manage judgements or we don't know how to effectively address a critique to somebody. Either way, that's why most people -at least I do- prefer not to comment anything.
The hardest work for me , then, is to think about what people's feelings are; if they are too sensitive for my extreme -some would say brutal- honesty, or if they are just looking for a good comment, or even if they're going to hate me for not approving or agreeing with them. However, I don't consider feelings that much, on the contrary I do believe that the most productive critiques are those that hurt the most, because adults do not need to be cheered all the time.
This is only a reflection about why we should be more critical with the others if we really want to help them/us, it might be difficult to say some things or to accept some comments, but as long as we learn how to criticize and how to use the critiques to improve ourselves we are going to take the word "criticism" in a more possitive sense and we are going to be able to enjoy its advantages. I'm open to any kind of critique, so please do not hesitate to comment what do you think about it.
According to wikipipedia, -it might not be the best source- "Criticism is the judgement of the merits and faults of the work or actions of one individual by another (the critic). To criticise does not necessarily imply to find fault, but the word is often taken to mean the simple expression of prejudice or disapproval". I actually like this definition because it shows the two perspectives of the issue, which means that criticize is not only giving validation to somebody else's work, but also recognizing the weakness of it.
In this sense, I agree with those who think that saying always good things is going to help; it might be encouraging for people if they hear: "I'm really impressed by your text!", or "You did a great job!", or "Keep working like this, never change!", -or whatever other praising phrases we make up-. But at the same time, I strongly believe that pointing out the good things is not going to help at all to improve the bad or weak ones. For me, pointing out the faults, not only the merits, would be more productive to the improvement of our writing process or, more general, our learning process.
The problem I've faced by thinking this way, is that I focus too much my attention in the things that I don't like -even recognizing the good things- and I say what I really think about it without taking the psychologist position, being sometimes too honest and hard on them. With this strategy, I've found that people do not want to be told any unpleasant or disapproval comment and some of them take it as a personal attack. One of two things is happening: we are so reluctant to critique that we don't even know how to manage judgements or we don't know how to effectively address a critique to somebody. Either way, that's why most people -at least I do- prefer not to comment anything.
The hardest work for me , then, is to think about what people's feelings are; if they are too sensitive for my extreme -some would say brutal- honesty, or if they are just looking for a good comment, or even if they're going to hate me for not approving or agreeing with them. However, I don't consider feelings that much, on the contrary I do believe that the most productive critiques are those that hurt the most, because adults do not need to be cheered all the time.
This is only a reflection about why we should be more critical with the others if we really want to help them/us, it might be difficult to say some things or to accept some comments, but as long as we learn how to criticize and how to use the critiques to improve ourselves we are going to take the word "criticism" in a more possitive sense and we are going to be able to enjoy its advantages. I'm open to any kind of critique, so please do not hesitate to comment what do you think about it.
Wednesday, 24 November 2010
[sic]
Sic – generally inside square brackets, [sic], and occasionally parentheses, (sic) – when added just after a quote or reprinted text, indicates that the passage is just as it appears from its original source. The usual purpose is to inform readers that any errors or apparent errors in the copied material are not from transcription – i.e. that they are reproduced exactly from the original writer or printer. Bracketed sics have also been used in humorous comments and for ridicule, typically by drawing attention to the original writer's mistakes.
Tuesday, 23 November 2010
quiz literacies
some questions to think about
Why does “practice” signal a shift away from fetishizing culture, language, literacy and other social phenomena?
Think of a situation to illustrate what a literacy event is. Analyze how social identities are displayed in that situation.
Compare/Contrast the two definitions of discourse you find in the article. In which aspects are they similar? In which aspects are they different?
Discuss and exemplify the two meanings the expression “Being educated” has in the Brazilian context.
Do you consider that literacy shaming is a form of symbolic violence in Colombia? Establish a relation between the case of Brazil and our case.
Do you consider that minority groups are discriminated or ridiculed at the Universidad del Valle, Cali because of their patterns of speech and their degree of literacy? Explain your answer.
In the adult literacy education program reported in the article, there were students who didn't stop viewing themselves as social inferiors. What cultural artifacts could help them reach their goal of literacy equality?
Why does “practice” signal a shift away from fetishizing culture, language, literacy and other social phenomena?
Think of a situation to illustrate what a literacy event is. Analyze how social identities are displayed in that situation.
Compare/Contrast the two definitions of discourse you find in the article. In which aspects are they similar? In which aspects are they different?
Discuss and exemplify the two meanings the expression “Being educated” has in the Brazilian context.
Do you consider that literacy shaming is a form of symbolic violence in Colombia? Establish a relation between the case of Brazil and our case.
Do you consider that minority groups are discriminated or ridiculed at the Universidad del Valle, Cali because of their patterns of speech and their degree of literacy? Explain your answer.
In the adult literacy education program reported in the article, there were students who didn't stop viewing themselves as social inferiors. What cultural artifacts could help them reach their goal of literacy equality?
Thursday, 18 November 2010
Information about Barbara Schneider
Taken from http://drdc.uchicago.edu/about/bios/schneider.html
Taken from http://drdc.uchicago.edu/about/bios/schneider.html
Barbara Schneider is currently a professor of sociology and human development at the University of Chicago and will join the faculty at Michigan State University as the John A. Hannah Chair in the College of Education in the fall of 2005. She currently directs the Data Research and Development Center, and co-directs the Alfred P. Sloan Center on Parents, Children, and Work.
Interested in the lives of adolescents and their families and schools, Schneider has written widely on these topics. Her most recent publications include: The Ambitious Generation: America 's Teenagers, Motivated but Directionless, co-authored with David Stevenson, Yale University Press; Becoming Adult: How Teenagers Prepare for the World of Work, co-authored with Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Basic Books; and Trust in Schools, A Core Resource for Improvement, co-authored with Anthony Bryk, Russell Sage Foundation. She and Linda Waite have recently completed a book based on findings from the Sloan 500 Family Study exploring the lives of working families entitled Being Together, Working Apart: Dual-Career Families and the Work-Life Balance, Cambridge University Press. Schneider is currently conducting a new random assignment project, TEACH Research, that is designed to improve adolescents' transition to post secondary education.
Schneider serves on a number of advisory boards including the AERA Grants Board. Recently, she was selected by the American Sociological Association as the new editor of Sociology of Education.
Tuesday, 9 November 2010
My PWP
STILL FRAGMENTS
Some time ago I was asking myself how members of the Congress make for knowing what the people’s needs are, whether they are not exactly ordinary people; I mean, most of the population in Colombia are poor and these special citizens have all the opportunities for a life style with privileges. So, how can they understand what people live without their same opportunities? That is to say, Congress members usually are in the capital city, frequenting the best and more expensive places, with big cars and fine clothes; I guess their children go to elite schools and private universities, very often abroad. That is all ok considering that anyone has the right to live it up, but if you are working for the country and you know that poverty exists in every region, that there are kids begging on the streets, unemployed women head of family, homeless persons walking around, peasants without land to work and so on… thus where are these people’s rights left? They also wish to live it up, or at least have a modest life, with an assured meal three times a day, an assured school for their children, an assured job for going on and an assured medical assistance. How do members of the Congress help to those situations earning what they earn, moving around their privileged social circle and living the same comfortable experiences day after day?
Answer: They do not help enough. Just like everyone, I said “it’s not fair” and I kept on my way.
I know many people have thought something like this once in a while, but we also know deep inside ourselves that one alone cannot change the system, so we don't even try. We prefer not to expect anything from the Congress, politicians or the law, for the better.
However, there are moments, occasions in which some persons decide to agree on their need of acting and do not allow to die the opposition, the resistance to injustice and the voice of people who live and suffer but it is not heard. Or sometimes this voice can be heard, for instance during elections, when politicians are in small towns asking for votes, but after the results of those elections promises seem to be forgotten and you think: if they are who got the tools to change the life style of those people who vote for them why nothing gets better?
...
Last Friday, October 8 was the opening of The Congress of the Peoples in Bogotá; the idea was to create a mandate made by the people from the masses in which the community would legislate, would order the territory, the economy and the way to govern themselves.
…
The Congress was organized by axes, distributed in seven working tables according to the major concerns of the people, these were:
- Land, territory and sovereignty.
- Economy for living and against the dislodging.
- Nation building for a good living.
- Culture, diversity and shared ethics.
- Life, justice […] politics.
- Rights violation and unfulfilled agreements.
- People’s integration and globalization of fights.
Most of the crowd were indigenous communities, especially from the Colombian southwest, as we know, indigenous in Cauca are one of the best organized movements in the country; you could realize that they were strong promoters of the event.
Next to the indigenous communities there were afro communities, peasants, students, “mototaxistas”, LGBT community and people concerned with the event, as well as journalists following the sessions. But these journalists belonged to a sort of independent press, maybe to ONGs, because there was no presence of Caracol or RCN at all.
All the axes were based in severe problems which concern for people’s well-being and the idea was to find a solution together; changes will not be done immediately but at least persons must begin to look for them. The plan was to identify first how the region had contributed to the axis, then what to do in the face of those current troubles and finally how do the people can organize themselves.
Many situations emerged in common in the different axes. That is, every concept was connected to each other: the act of living implies to deal with justice, culture, territory, rights, and so on. In consequence, a variety of similar problems were mentioned on several occasions, such as the recuperation and release of the earth and its natural resources because of the importance in both the native conception of earth as a Mother and the need for preserving the means in existence for sustainability.
This was perhaps the strongest point remarked during the Congress: territory. “Land is neither for buying nor for sale, land is for liberating it and defending it”. That is the speech which constantly sounded around; indigenous people, peasants and population from rural areas have been the victims of forced displacing, by reason of armed movements or multinational companies, the first ones for drug trafficking and the second ones for exploitation of the environment. They reject both. These people feel forgotten and isolated because the government knows this but does not offer a fair solution, we can see that. There are hundreds of people on the streets begging for surviving. Citizens do not differentiate among drug addicts, wanderers or displaced persons, and that happens especially in the capital city, where the law provides them with a basic supply and lodging into cheap hostels, endowed with mats which are 1 centimeter thick.
.....
Some time ago I was asking myself how members of the Congress make for knowing what the people’s needs are, whether they are not exactly ordinary people; I mean, most of the population in Colombia are poor and these special citizens have all the opportunities for a life style with privileges. So, how can they understand what people live without their same opportunities? That is to say, Congress members usually are in the capital city, frequenting the best and more expensive places, with big cars and fine clothes; I guess their children go to elite schools and private universities, very often abroad. That is all ok considering that anyone has the right to live it up, but if you are working for the country and you know that poverty exists in every region, that there are kids begging on the streets, unemployed women head of family, homeless persons walking around, peasants without land to work and so on… thus where are these people’s rights left? They also wish to live it up, or at least have a modest life, with an assured meal three times a day, an assured school for their children, an assured job for going on and an assured medical assistance. How do members of the Congress help to those situations earning what they earn, moving around their privileged social circle and living the same comfortable experiences day after day?
Answer: They do not help enough. Just like everyone, I said “it’s not fair” and I kept on my way.
I know many people have thought something like this once in a while, but we also know deep inside ourselves that one alone cannot change the system, so we don't even try. We prefer not to expect anything from the Congress, politicians or the law, for the better.
However, there are moments, occasions in which some persons decide to agree on their need of acting and do not allow to die the opposition, the resistance to injustice and the voice of people who live and suffer but it is not heard. Or sometimes this voice can be heard, for instance during elections, when politicians are in small towns asking for votes, but after the results of those elections promises seem to be forgotten and you think: if they are who got the tools to change the life style of those people who vote for them why nothing gets better?
...
Last Friday, October 8 was the opening of The Congress of the Peoples in Bogotá; the idea was to create a mandate made by the people from the masses in which the community would legislate, would order the territory, the economy and the way to govern themselves.
…
The Congress was organized by axes, distributed in seven working tables according to the major concerns of the people, these were:
- Land, territory and sovereignty.
- Economy for living and against the dislodging.
- Nation building for a good living.
- Culture, diversity and shared ethics.
- Life, justice […] politics.
- Rights violation and unfulfilled agreements.
- People’s integration and globalization of fights.
Most of the crowd were indigenous communities, especially from the Colombian southwest, as we know, indigenous in Cauca are one of the best organized movements in the country; you could realize that they were strong promoters of the event.
Next to the indigenous communities there were afro communities, peasants, students, “mototaxistas”, LGBT community and people concerned with the event, as well as journalists following the sessions. But these journalists belonged to a sort of independent press, maybe to ONGs, because there was no presence of Caracol or RCN at all.
All the axes were based in severe problems which concern for people’s well-being and the idea was to find a solution together; changes will not be done immediately but at least persons must begin to look for them. The plan was to identify first how the region had contributed to the axis, then what to do in the face of those current troubles and finally how do the people can organize themselves.
Many situations emerged in common in the different axes. That is, every concept was connected to each other: the act of living implies to deal with justice, culture, territory, rights, and so on. In consequence, a variety of similar problems were mentioned on several occasions, such as the recuperation and release of the earth and its natural resources because of the importance in both the native conception of earth as a Mother and the need for preserving the means in existence for sustainability.
This was perhaps the strongest point remarked during the Congress: territory. “Land is neither for buying nor for sale, land is for liberating it and defending it”. That is the speech which constantly sounded around; indigenous people, peasants and population from rural areas have been the victims of forced displacing, by reason of armed movements or multinational companies, the first ones for drug trafficking and the second ones for exploitation of the environment. They reject both. These people feel forgotten and isolated because the government knows this but does not offer a fair solution, we can see that. There are hundreds of people on the streets begging for surviving. Citizens do not differentiate among drug addicts, wanderers or displaced persons, and that happens especially in the capital city, where the law provides them with a basic supply and lodging into cheap hostels, endowed with mats which are 1 centimeter thick.
.....
Rap News!! Wow!!
http://www.youtube.com/user/thejuicemedia
And this guy makes some excellent raps about the news!!
I know this is not literature based, but he does however use the power of words and is really clever in his concise mix of content and rhyme... enjoy! The Al Gore climate change rap is my favourite!!
Listening practice ahoy!!
LIAR LIAR!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQFwxw57NBI
Hey everyone! Sorry I havent corrected anything recently on the blog!
Ill see you all in class tomorrow morning!
Here is a short new music video describing some of the problems we are having in England with
our stupid conservative led coallition government! Good tune too!!
Friday, 29 October 2010
About Writing
It is believed that writing destroys the ability to memorize and weakness thoughts. Those who use it tend to forget as they related on an exterior mechanism in order to remember. I think the process of writing is to your mind as exercise is to your body; for we all, as human beings, it is very normal that each year we lose our memory, according to this we need to use those "external mechanisms" that help us to do different things; for instance, writing makes us think and this practice allows us to remember our thoughts, feelings, actions and life.
By the other hand, Writing establishes context-free language and autonomous discourse that cannot be doubted or directly questioned because the written discourse is separated from its author. Obviously you as a reader can question what do you read, in spite this the written discourse it is not separated from the author because it shows what the author thinks, feels, etc, most of the time in a clearer way, understandable for every body. For example when I write I think I am transmitting my feelings and thoughts, I want to share that and I want the reader get my point. For me a text is like the curriculum vitae of the author.
Nowadays, writing is the means through which speech can be transmitted and preserved. This statement is accepted by many as an absolute truth, however writing is not the only way to transmit and preserve the speech; the cultures with oral traditions deny this fact, because for many years they have kept their stories and their history through this practice.
According to that, it is normal that writing must be understood as technology and therefore, as artificial. This thought comes to our mind because of our oral tradition and all the elements use for writing, for many years we just needed our mouth and mind to tell stories and communicate between each other, now I dare to say that writing is technology and artificial because from many years until now we see new things, tools, machines, elements, etc, use for writing.
Wednesday, 27 October 2010
Dear students,
the following are some tasks I would like you to develop before we meet on Friday:
Google Lesley Bartlett and Dorothy Holland, authors of the article we are reading:
Theorizing the space of literacy practices.
Look for information to extend the definition of "Literacy shaming"
I also need everyone to send the last version of your PWPs to inglesiks@gmail.com
Finally, I recommend you to look for info about the movie we are watching: Happy go Lucky.
See you on Friday!
the following are some tasks I would like you to develop before we meet on Friday:
Google Lesley Bartlett and Dorothy Holland, authors of the article we are reading:
Theorizing the space of literacy practices.
Look for information to extend the definition of "Literacy shaming"
I also need everyone to send the last version of your PWPs to inglesiks@gmail.com
Finally, I recommend you to look for info about the movie we are watching: Happy go Lucky.
See you on Friday!
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
AWAKENING
Hey you guys... this is a personal -a really one- experiment -I'd like to call it like that... I hope you all enjoy this short story... It was a hard, itchy and tough work... I never thought that writing and re-writing was that hard... but finally this is my product and, of course you can let me know your opinions... bye guys....
By Rogelio Herrera Marin
Carol Stanford is an outstanding college student; she is twenty three and has never been in love. She is well known for her curly hair, easygoing personality and beautiful gray-blue eyes. Not as attractive as she would like, and as clever as to be number one in her class; she clearly has a point, and beauty matters don't puzzle her mind.
The moment I met her, she took my breath away. She looked so fragile, so tender, her childish face and mumbling movements hypnotized me, as an elder magician in ancient times. But this is Carol’s story. My feelings have never been known, and they will remain so.
“14th August 2008. A cold morning, yellow and brown covers the whole landscape; a sense of lifeless is all over around. I miss my family. Not in the mood to go to classes” Carol wrote in her diary. She woke up early, washed her hair and took a bath. She brushed her teeth and went out of her room. No breakfast, only a cup of coffee. No-one saw her going out. Brenda, her roommate wasn’t there; she spent the night out, probably with her new boyfriend.
Carol walked for ten minutes, got to the train station, bought her ticket and waited for her train. Express line number thirteen. Two minutes later a loudspeaker announced that her train was delayed. She didn’t mind it. After a few seconds she realized that she was the only person in that wagon. She took a look her watch, six thirty in the morning. She felt overwhelmed. Carol was the kind of person that never showed her emotions, not even to herself. Then, two guys and an old lady walked down the stairs, and she sort of felt a relief.
Waiting in that place, she looked herself as a “regular” person, which made Carol feel sad. She flashbacked her childhood, a non-special – kind of tragic- one; her working mother was usually too busy to catch up with the upbringing of a kid. An alcoholic father and a, fourteen-year-old, drug-addict brother made her run away from home when she was sixteen. She moved in with an aunt, her mother little’s sister, who lived with her husband and a son, in a middle-class neighborhood in New Jersey. Her aunt knew very closely Carol’s situation, so she didn’t have a problem to welcome her niece home.
Six forty five a train passed by and made her came back to that moment. The old lady took that train. While passing near Carol, she smiled at her exactly like a grandmother would to her grandchild, with certain love and care that no-one else could. Carol felt a warm feeling in her chest, and smiled back to the old lady. She never met her grandmother. Her mother told her that she was too little to remind her; she died of a stroke when she was eighty five. Carol was three. Her father told her that his mother died when he was eleven.
At this moment, it was almost seven; she looked at her watch again and played a little with its bottoms. The place was now crowded with people and it was difficult to breath; Carol hadn’t realized when all those people arrived. Just five more minutes, and her train should be here, she started to feel impatient.
She closed her eyes and watched herself some years in the future, sitting on a comfortable chair, drinking a nice cup of coffee in the company of her beloved. No problems at all. She smiled at her two children – a boy and a girl – who played with their dog, a golden retriever, a gift for Christmas. Carol, saw a beautiful household, full of joy and love.
-“Excuse me,” a man touched her arm and woke her up abruptly from her dream. -“What time is it?” the man asked Carol pointing at her watch. - “It's five past seven”. She answered. The man thanked her and continued his way. Carol felt upset about that scene. She just hated being asked by strangers.
Carol thought about Brenda – her roommate – she was so open-minded and so calm that almost nothing could disturb her; she would have loved to see her this morning. Carol laughed. Her mobile rang, it was an unknown number. She answered; wrong number.
The loudspeaker announced the arrival of Carol’s train. She wondered if she would be on time to Mrs. Bearing’s class. It was seven and ten, the train takes forty five minutes to get to the nearest station, from that point on, Carol must walk for ten minutes to get to the campus, but the class starts at eight o’clock. While she was thinking about that, the train stopped. The doors opened, some people went out and Carol finally gets in.
Nine minutes later, Carol feels confused, her mouth was dry and her sight blurry, her entire world went upside down. She fainted in the train. People ran to help her but it was too late. Carol was unconscious, no breathing at all.
A beeping sound starts to fill the air, beep, beep, beep… that is the sound Carol listens to, darkness becomelightness, clarity and brightness. Carol wakes up; her alarm was ringing all over her room. It is August the 14th 2008, five thirty in the morning. “A cold morning, yellow and brown covers the whole landscape; a sense of lifeless is all over around. I miss my family. Not in the mood to go to classes” Carol writes in her diary.
Tuesday, 12 October 2010
Reflections on writing: the four statements
According to the statements given in class, writing is the means through which speech can be transmitted and preserved. I consider really accurate this assertion, for human beings writing is a necessity in order to preserve knowledge even though speech can also transmit what people have in their minds. Knowledge through speech would remain alive as long as the society keep strong the oral tradition as a fundamental practice to access knowledge, transmit cultural values and social organization. However, speech can not record every single detail of the complexities of new social and economic organizations. In this place appears writing, to serve as a means for the constant development of societies.
Since the practice of writing uses different kind of tools, it can be understood as a technology, but in my view is not artificial. I do believe writing is a technology in the sense that its beginnings were quite primitive, from pictures to scripts, and finally we have improved it. Writing is a technology because it has helped us to access knowledge, to share thoughts with other people, to develop new tools, to expand ideologies. Therefore, writing is not artificial just because of authentic origins, the development of writing was not planned to imitate nature but to improve social relationships. It is natural the need of humans to socialize, then writing is natural because of its social function for human beings.
Although some people believe writing destroys the ability to memorize and weakens thought and those who use it tend to forget as they rely on an exterior mechanism in order to remember, I personally disagree with this statement because writing demands complex processes of the brain in which the writer increases consciousness that allows him to internalize a complete view of the subject matter in a meaningfully way. For this simple reason, memorize words is worthless when what is being memorized does not have any significance for the writer.
Writing establishes a context- free language as opposed to the context-linked language in orality. When a writer is building a text he/she needs to establish the purpose of the text and consider the audience for it in order to explain in a comprehensive way what his/her thoughts are. Because of this, the reader could not question directly or interact with the writer, in this situation the reader must start using the complex functions of thought and develop new strategies to understand what the text says. This mutuality sets up the real importance of these two practices for society; it encourages people to think about the other, to use many mental processes in which the brain strengthens.
Since the practice of writing uses different kind of tools, it can be understood as a technology, but in my view is not artificial. I do believe writing is a technology in the sense that its beginnings were quite primitive, from pictures to scripts, and finally we have improved it. Writing is a technology because it has helped us to access knowledge, to share thoughts with other people, to develop new tools, to expand ideologies. Therefore, writing is not artificial just because of authentic origins, the development of writing was not planned to imitate nature but to improve social relationships. It is natural the need of humans to socialize, then writing is natural because of its social function for human beings.
Although some people believe writing destroys the ability to memorize and weakens thought and those who use it tend to forget as they rely on an exterior mechanism in order to remember, I personally disagree with this statement because writing demands complex processes of the brain in which the writer increases consciousness that allows him to internalize a complete view of the subject matter in a meaningfully way. For this simple reason, memorize words is worthless when what is being memorized does not have any significance for the writer.
Writing establishes a context- free language as opposed to the context-linked language in orality. When a writer is building a text he/she needs to establish the purpose of the text and consider the audience for it in order to explain in a comprehensive way what his/her thoughts are. Because of this, the reader could not question directly or interact with the writer, in this situation the reader must start using the complex functions of thought and develop new strategies to understand what the text says. This mutuality sets up the real importance of these two practices for society; it encourages people to think about the other, to use many mental processes in which the brain strengthens.
Some Reflections on Writing
1. I disagree with the firs statement because writing discourse is inscribed in a social context, but also in a “personal context”. The “personal context” is that in which we can include: the author’s reasons, that means that the author discourse is generated by her/his ideology, reflections, believes, thought and knowledge about the world, her/his society and the discipline in which the writing discourse is linked. Thus the text also is influenced by a social context, and also it develops a role within the society.
In this way I think that writing discourse can't be separated from its author, and that writing needs the context. And of course I think that a writing discourse can be doubted or questioned.
2. I don’t think writing discourse destroys the ability to memorize, or that it weakens thought because writing is an exercise in which we have to put in action some of our previous knowledge and other mental skills that are strengthened or improved through writing.
3. Writing could be understood as a technology, and therefore as artificial in the sense of writing was created by human as other technologies. And according to Walter J. Ong “by contrast with natural, oral speech, writing is completely artificial. There is no way to write ‘naturally’. (Walter Ong: 1982).
4. I agree with the fourth statement, because through writing we can preserve and transmit our speech. However writing isn’t the only way to do it, because for instance oral tradition also does that. The advantage of printed word is that it tends to preserve the author’s speech without modifications for ages.
In this way I think that writing discourse can't be separated from its author, and that writing needs the context. And of course I think that a writing discourse can be doubted or questioned.
2. I don’t think writing discourse destroys the ability to memorize, or that it weakens thought because writing is an exercise in which we have to put in action some of our previous knowledge and other mental skills that are strengthened or improved through writing.
3. Writing could be understood as a technology, and therefore as artificial in the sense of writing was created by human as other technologies. And according to Walter J. Ong “by contrast with natural, oral speech, writing is completely artificial. There is no way to write ‘naturally’. (Walter Ong: 1982).
4. I agree with the fourth statement, because through writing we can preserve and transmit our speech. However writing isn’t the only way to do it, because for instance oral tradition also does that. The advantage of printed word is that it tends to preserve the author’s speech without modifications for ages.
Hey u all guys... I really miss u a lot... I've been reading all that u all have posted and I've found it excellent, they are beatifully written. However there is something that makes me feel worried about it... Remember that the idea is to create an interactive community where people can express their feelings and thoughts, in this process it is necessary to "hear" what other people thinks about our writing itsellf... So please "interact"... (I know I'm not part of this group on an academics sense, and I'm sorry if I hurt some feelings but I carry u all in my heart and I think this blog is an outstanding opportunity in order to develop our skills, accuracy and fluency at writting besides, it's an excellent tool to get to know who we really are - jajaja sound funny isn't it... but it's true.)
That's it... love u all...
That's it... love u all...
Saturday, 9 October 2010
"timequake"
One wakes up knowing
that one has dreamed about that time
when love was the pure and perfect silence
between two very attentive hearts,
when sadness existed just for writing letters,
when everything, even the most little detail of the days,
was filled with the other's magic.
One wakes up to find again
this sensation that comes as in those mortuary sunsets,
this hard and heavy sensation like fake pride,
this sensation that means and that says
that the chaotic uncertainty of keeping on journeying the days
and the tireless labor of love
will be joined forever
-or at least for the time being.
that one has dreamed about that time
when love was the pure and perfect silence
between two very attentive hearts,
when sadness existed just for writing letters,
when everything, even the most little detail of the days,
was filled with the other's magic.
One wakes up to find again
this sensation that comes as in those mortuary sunsets,
this hard and heavy sensation like fake pride,
this sensation that means and that says
that the chaotic uncertainty of keeping on journeying the days
and the tireless labor of love
will be joined forever
-or at least for the time being.
On Writing and Orality
The words are not good for the secret meaning, everything always becomes a bit different, as soon as it is put into words, gets distorted a bit, a bit silly—yes, and this is also very good, and I like it a lot, I also very much agree with this, that this what is one man's treasure and wisdom always sounds like foolishness to another person.
Siddhartha, Hermann Hesse, 1922.
If orality is itself a means through thoughts and feelings can be communicated from oneself to others, literacy would be a heavy technological extension of this means. It gives us the possibility to create an extension of the reality, a representation, a separate world of the reality. And I could interpret it in different levels:
1. Literacy as representation of human thoughts in relation with the universe (reality).
2. Literacy as a tool for a certain context-free communication.
I consider that the relation among meanings-thoughts-words-writings can be seen as different stages of one single sequence or can be seen as different relations of disparate processes. In a deeper reflection on these processes one can experiment an affliction, a suffocation conditioned by the heaviness of all the ideas that literacy has helped to create referring to mind shaping and mind behavior. Although writing is an advanced technology -maybe the most- in which people can transmit their culture, their feelings, their knowledge, it also brings a separation, a distortion, a blurred image of the real meaning. And that is excellent because there is no equivalence between the representation and that what is represented.
These different relations differ from peoples to peoples, depending on their perceptions of the world. Thus writing could be and has been useful to maintain memories and history as in a library. This can be considered as an extension of humankind memory but, some communities don't have writing culture and their knowledge has been preserved through orality, maybe because there are many roads toward the comprehension of existence. However writing can shape in an enormous way the rapprochement between the subject and the object, as an instrument of seeing in peoples with a written culture
Friday, 8 October 2010
LANGUAGE POLICY, CULTURE AND IDENTITY IN INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES AT UNIVERSIDAD DEL VALLE
INTRODUCTION
Social inclusion as a policy at the Universidad del Valle has been always a utopia because there are many possibilities to enter here, but not to keep studying until finishing. In the case of indigenous communities they are a synonym of resistance, in spite of many years of violence, destruction of their habitats, forced displacement, cultural extinction, they have been fighting in silence, in peace with the only weapon they have: their knowledge.
Although their knowledge is not enough at the time to begin and to continue a professional career, can we ask why? That is because social inclusion inside Universidad del Valle beyond more that just the access to the institution, it is necessary politic policies in which these communities can find the recognition of their culture and their language as a reflection of that culture.
In this complex situation, indigenous have been working in the process of professionalization of their members who are bilingual teachers, through CRIC (Consejo Regional Indigena del Cauca), but the tensions arising from the linguistic policies in which Spanish is the predominant language, left as a result, a high level of desertion in the university. Therefore this paper is an approximation to understand this context in which the language policy, culture and identity are a system of domination, still alive here in our university.
BACK TO HISTORY: EXPERIENCES AROUND THE PROBLEMS INDIGENOUS STUDENTS HAVE WITH OUR CULTURE
In 2007 I worked with professor Luis Emilio Mora and Esperanza Arciniegas in a program of Spanish for indigenous communities called “Proyecto universidad y culturas” in which the point was the creation of this program in order to help indigenous who were studying here without possibilities to understand Spanish courses, in there I met Gabriela Patiño Lakatos a psychology member of the group “Cultura y desarrollo humano” that belongs to Psychology Institute in Universidad del Valle, nowadays directed by Maria Cristina Tenorio, teacher of this Institute, in this proposal I knew the experiences of Gabriela Patiño with Veronica Guerrero a student of psychology from Nasa Yuwe ( Resguardo Nasa de Miranda Cauca) in a mentoring of development of writing and reading skills.
Through this experience we realize there was a problem beyond inclusion at the university, she had been studying in a program of the university focused on training in western music, after that she was fighting with the teachers of Psychology Institute because she was in front of at least two big problems: the reading of complex text and the references unconnected with her personal experience and school education.
But the complications around the problems in writing and reading of indigenous students led as a result the creation of intensive Spanish course focused on reading comprehension and expressive writing for the students of the first three semesters.
Common writing problems: from a philosophy of life that turns in spiral
Writing as a complex process requires a constant exercise, more than that, writing is a process that includes a personal experience, particular knowledge’s, motivation and some other things referring to this process.
· Decoding problems
· Problems with the meaning of punctuation marks
· Nothing of importance to specialized words
· Non-Western cultural references
· Sensitivity problems around the topics the text are talking about
· Problems to abstract the relation between the parts of the argumentative structure of the text
· Difficulties in relation with the style of the author
Interpretation of the punctuation marks: If the reader is not conscious with the sense and the function of the punctuation marks, it is impossible to understand the meaning of the author.
Thursday, 7 October 2010
SPEAK UP FOR WRITING
| I |
f we consider writing as a human invent, we are considering it as a technology at the same time. As compared to oral speech, writing is an external tool to human being, therefore less natural to them. According to J.Ong, writing is essential for the realization of fuller, interior human potentials, given that writing as a technology, transforms the consciousness by affecting the word. As a matter of opinion I consider the dialogue as the most important characteristic developed trough writing -i.e- in writing, authors first have to recreate a context and an audience so they can discuss.
There is no doubt that thanks to writing many cultures around the world have made their history preserve. When Plato first wrote his “Dialogues” he hardly imagined that it would last for so long; nowadays his thoughts are the centre of a philosophy lecture thanks to writing. Nonetheless, writing it is not the only way to make the speech preserve. As a matter of example, there are many “no-westernized” cultures with such a rich oral tradition, in those contexts knowledge is preserved though speech, so, any kind of writing is no required.
Besides, Rather than weakens the thought, writing strengthens it. We have to take into account the mental process that has to be developed in order to try to "materialize" our thoughts. It is commonly accepted that in knowledge-contruction process it is necessary, therefore important, that the person drive his thoughts through any kind of writing so the knowledge built is significative. Besides, this statement does not consider that thanks to writing, history was born and evolved until present time so the memories as humans remains.
All the authors write for someone else. According to George Orwell, one of the motives for an author to write it is sheer egoism, it is the desire to be talked about, which can stimulate someone to write. From this perspective the written discourse is not separated from its author; this is because, in writing, the author establishes a dialogical connexion between his or hers words and the audience. Therefore the autonomous discourse it’s only autonomous in an objective and abstract level, nonetheless it is not in a subjective level which means that any discourse can be doubted in this later level.
Wednesday, 6 October 2010
REFLECTIONS ON WRITING
Writing is the very own reflection of our feelings and stands captured on a sheet, physical or virtual, indeed, some authors tend to call their work as their own children, and your children are people different from you, but still represent everything you are, everything you teach them is everything you believe that's good in life, so when denying the content or stands of a particular writing or a particular author, you're directly telling him (or her) that he (or she) is wrong, or his (or hers) statements could be improved in some way.
We could also say that writing is the most accurate process or exercise to memorize something, because while putting every letter on the paper you're constructing and giving a due structure to the many ideas that are roaming in your mind and coming to you as you need them, and given that our hability to memorize some ideas is a brain function that is often limited by natural conditions, writing not only aims to keep creating and coming up with new and original ideas, but it sets a place where to put those ideas in a well built structure and remember what you were thinking at a certain moment.
It is for sure artificial, a technique that evolves according to social contexts and situations, something that can be improved and demands certain skills in order to come up with a really good piece of work. It's the very reflection of human behavior and reasoning, and given so, it's an atificial creation. By this mean, speech and ideas can be transmitted and preserved in its natural form, without any change, until another writer makes a related statement that can refute or support it, changing its original state and sustaining its main argument or suggesting another perspective.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)