Parker, English, Learning, Teaching

The historical development of what we currently think of as the study of English Literature and Language is interesting. However, the parts that struck me most about Parker's article and our subsequent class discussion were certain ideas about teaching and learning. For instance, the most interesting part of Parker's paper (to me) was the point at which he associated the fact that kids today have trouble reading and writing with the idea that teaching English is a fairly young discipline. He says, kind of rudely, that teachers of English are like "children in [their] ignorance or innocence, still fumbling and faddish or lacking well-defined goals" (6). Presumably this is because what "English Language and Literature" means has changed radically over the last 100+ years, so who we are and what we are supposed to be doing is not always clear.

I think most of us feel, however, that English would be a more full-bodied discipline if it incorporated more aspects of Rhetoric and Oratory. I mean, freshman composition (that modern adaptation of Rhetoric) isn't going away. It's a mainstay of English Departments. So let's take what's there and run with it!

On a complete side note, Dr. Kemp made two remarks in Tuesday's class that really stuck in my head: first, that people who are good at English are generally people who were inculcated with the rules and conventions of the subject through years and years of personal reading, and second, that it is very tough to teach someone to express themselves skillfully and honestly when all you do is correct them.

The first point resonated with me because it is exactly how I learned to read and write. My father read to me daily until I learned to read to myself, at which point I became inseparable from the public library. Over the years, I developed an intuitive sense of what words meant and how to manipulate them effectively.

The second point sounded very similar to the way I used to talk to my little brother about English when he had problems. I would show him what was wrong with his papers, but I didn't know what to do beyond giving him the relevant rule for it and hoping that would solve the problem. Sometimes he didn't seem to be breaking any particular rule, but his writing still felt awkward and just not quite right. We both got frustrated at these times--especially me, because I was supposed to be the one who knew what I was doing.

I guess all that is to say that I'd never thought about those things too deeply before. I feel like I have a new awareness of the gap between my abilities as a student and what my responsibilities will be as a teacher. I definitely need to turn a more critical eye to how I myself read and write so that I can articulate what I know more effectively. Understanding where English Literature and Language comes from and having a sense of where it should go in the future is another part of that.