March 2009

One of the things I do is teach sociology students.  So I was interested in a post by one of my regular blog reads entitled “Sociology: An Evil ‘Science’.”

It starts with an interesting premise “I’ve returned to the university as an online student after a 33-year absence from academia.” Since I’ve been thinking more about online teaching (and will be taking a class in order to be an online teacher), I was very interested in that for reasons other than sociology.

But his discussion of sociology was interesting too.

Sociology is less of a “science” than a cult, or even a belief system that has underlying assumptions, such as the assumption that “the system,” particularly the capitalist variety, is inherently unfair, and that our society is replete with victims who are being treated unfairly, i.e. various racial groups, feminism etc.

It is an interesting discussion and a description I have not come across in academia before. I wonder how many of my sociology students would agree with it.

Then it goes into why sociology is evil.

Multiple Sources for the Judith Poem

Although it is common to examine only the apocryphal book of Judith as a source for the Old English Judith poem, this view is too limiting.  Aside from the apocryphal Judith, Christian traditions, Old English heroic traditions, and the valkyries of Old Norse mythos could easily have contributed to the construction of the poem.  There are clear differences between the apocryphal Judith and the Old English Judith.  One possible source for the differences is Christian tradition, which gives a higher status to a virgin than to a widow.  A second tradition that could have contributed to the recreation of the poem is Anglo-Saxon heroic poetry.  In many ways, Judith is similar to the heroic male warriors and her story is similar to the heroic stories of the same time period.  The third tradition which may have effected the creation of the poem is the valkyries of Old Norse mythology.  The poetic Judith can be clearly seen as the product of a heroic religiously syncretistic age.  The Judith who emerges in the Old English poem is a uniquely Anglo-Saxon hero whose sex does not limit her heroic qualities but enhances them.

I will be giving this at the Useful Past presentation in Tyler, Texas.

Often students will complain about us, in the halls and in the classroom. “She’s too hard.” Or “We have to write EVERY class period.”

Often the criticisms are actually about the students, since they don’t want to study, or about colleagues, since they don’t require the same level of work.

If your students are making progress in your classes, then maybe it’s not all about you, even when they say it is.

Also encourage the students to think of the positive things that have been done in the classroom. “We learned how to do X. When you get to class Y, you will already know how to do X by yourself. So when the instructor says, ‘Go do X’ you will be able to!”

When you have students who are saying nice things about you or the class, note them. Write them down. For most people it takes TEN good things to overcome a single criticism. That means you will need a record of the ten good things.

Also, if you write them down, including the date and who said them and under what circumstance, you may be able to use them in your tenure review. Some colleges let you do that. Just make sure you keep it up. You don’t want two comments only. And you certainly don’t want to make that stuff up.

One thing I’ve begun trying to do more is ask the students to tell me what I am doing well. I explain that I revise the syllabus every semester and I would like their input on what they don’t want me to change, what they found helpful. I actually use these to decide what to leave out and what to keep and I let them know that, too.

One college has spring break this week.  One has it next.  I am almost caught up on all my grading.  And I’ve actually had time to read.  Yeah for spring break!

Dr. Sunny Jiang Schultz of Lee College spoke on the topic of “The Byte is Mightier than the Pen” on Friday, March 6, at CCTE’s State of the Profession at UT-Austin’s AT&T Conference Center.

She spent less than twenty minutes talking about her online classes versus her traditional classes for the same course, though she has a significantly longer paper available. However, in that time, she managed to convince me that online courses have great potential to be better composition courses.

She did a comparison of completed assignments between her traditional (f2f) and online (net) classes.

Quiz questions: f2f 83, net 140
Sentence revision: f2f 2, net 4
Summaries: f2f 2, net 4
Elaborations: f2f 1, net 2
Papers: f2f 3, net 3
Short paragraphs: f2f 10, net 50
Library usage: f2f 2, net 10 (through data base accesses for required assignments)

Another aspect of her presentation that I especially appreciated was her discussion of how she works with her students to make sure that they are prepared for and committed to an online course. She provides a week and a half for the students to complete a very detailed online orientation. If they do not finish that, she drops them. If they aren’t committed, they won’t be able to do the course and both they and she will know it right away.

My favorite metaphor from her talk was when she said, “Writing skills are becoming an endangered species.”

Students:

Online education offers the students the opportunity to work around their personal and professional lives while still getting an education because they can take advantage of learning opportunities at a time that is appropriate for them.

The need to juggle competing schedules is eliminated. Students will not be faced, as my son was this semester, with three required classes all offered at the same time.

Students who are geographically isolated can use online courses to complete their education.

Students can receive a better education. While some perceive face-to-face courses as more rigorous, traditional classrooms often have fewer writing assignments (Schultz). This is because an online class is conducted through online writing. Since one of the goals of an education is to learn to communicate effectively, this aspect of online education can only be considered beneficial.

Teachers:

Teachers also can work when most appropriate for them.  

Online courses can save money.  Teachers won’t have to pay for gas and wear and tear on their cars.  

Working online can also potentially save time. One teacher compared her traditional and online classes. When she put all her class-related time together, she spent 234 minutes per student online and 441 minutes per student in face-to-face classes (Thomas).

Schools:

Online education offers a significant cost savings when classes are not using the physical campus. My college offered eleven different English courses online in the fall of 2008, which meant over forty classes did not meet in classrooms.

The college has students attending, and paying fees, from all over the state because students do not have to live nearby to attend. This means an increase in revenue.

At a time when the economy is problematic and an education is more important than ever, online classes can benefit everyone involved.

This has been one of the issues I have been struggling with, not only as a college instructor but also as the parent of college students.

I found an interesting article online, The Meaning of the Baccalaureate.

What are students taking away from their college educations, and what are they bringing to their states in terms of intellectual capital? In other words, what do they know and what can they do? (4) The core set of capacities that policymakers would like to see in college graduates—critical-thinking, communication, and problem-solving skills—is one that I think academicians can accept. (5)
…In the postindustrial, postinformation age, a great many people need to be mentally prepared the way only the elite used to be—capable of shaping, rather than simply being subject to the effects of, the historical changes that will create the context for their lives. (6)

In the article, Margaret A. Miller goes through the National Education Goals, particularly goal six. These were goals for the year 2000, which has passed and which we have not met. They make an interesting read all by themselves.

Every major American business will be involved in strengthening the connection between education and work.

All workers will have the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills, from basic to highly technical, needed to adapt to emerging new technologies, work methods, and markets through public and private educational, vocational, technical, workplace, or other programs.

The number of quality programs, including those at libraries, that are designed to serve more effectively the needs of the growing number of part-time and midcareer students will increase substantially.

The proportion of qualified students, especially minorities, who enter college, who complete at least two years, and who complete their degree programs will increase substantially.

The proportion of college graduates who demonstrate an advanced ability to think critically, communicate effectively, and solve problems will increase substantially. [emphasis mine -ed.]

Schools, in implementing comprehensive parent involvement programs, will offer more adult literacy, parent training and lifelong learning opportunities to improve the ties between home and school, and enhance parents’ work and home lives.

I wonder why we think we need more college graduates, although I agree with college grads being able to think critically, communicate effectively, and solve problems.

A commenter left an address for a white paper on helping low SES students succeed in higher education.

I have just skimmed it so far, but it looks like it would be a good resource.

Update: Not so much.  It is actually just an advertisement created to look like a paper.

I was asked to read a paper on the character of Shepherd Book. I skimmed and then emailed them. I didn’t feel able to make a positive long response. Here are some things I thought of it. I think it is somewhat relevant as I may be teaching the Shepherd Book graphic novel one of these days. This paper might be one way to have discussions.

For all his Bible carrying, when it comes to communicating his faith or guiding others, Shepherd Book is self-deprecating and reluctant.
Where Book does quickly step in to offer guidance is in situations needing military knowledge and police tactics (15).

Their view of fundamentalism is odd. I don’t see it that way and wonder why they do. There did not seem to be a statement of where they are coming from, though they argue about Book based on what he does. So… they are opposed to fundamentalism. They either have no experience with it or only bad experiences or a bad experience so great that it overcame any good experiences. They use fundamentalism, and words like conversion, in their own way. They quote from Psychoanalytic Review on “Bible Says: The Christianity of Fundamentalism.”

Then they go on.

But Shepherd Book’s story does not involve seeking atonement; his is a story that deals with the aftermath of conversion. Conversion completely does away with the need for atonement. If atonement is a means of transformation, conversion is a means of transferal. You cannot atone for what you cannot face in yourself. (10)

What theology are they proposing with this thought? It is not a Christian theology that I have ever heard of. Atonement, as Wikipedia will tell you, is a doctrine on how God forgives humanity’s sins on an individual and group basis. Atonement is not something people do. It is something God does.

It is part of the conversion process. As a sinner, you recognize your sin. You are sorry about that sin and decide to stop sinning, as best you know how. You ask God to forgive you for your sin. Here is where atonement comes in. Then God forgives you and makes it (for him) as if you had never done the sin. That is transformation. But it is also transferal because God took it on himself.

From Romans 3:

22This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

Then the paper gives some definition for atonement and conversion.

While atonement is achieved by working through the choices and events of one’s own personal narrative, conversion involves the adoption of a narrative outside of one’s self. (10)

Again, I think they have made a word choice to use a word that doesn’t mean to them what it means to most. Atonement is a Christian word, original or not, and it means that Jesus made up for our sins. He took them so we will not be punished for them.

Is there a theology (There must be.) that says that atonement is something you do yourself? I know that LDS believe that. Is that where they are coming from?

About Book:
I absolutely agree that Book appears to be running away. I agree that Book does not seem to be consistent in his faith. He doubts. He uses the Bible as a prop, not as reality. But does that make him an inauthentic Christian? I often use the Bible as a prop. I have many in my house that I don’t read on a regular basis. In fact, I use the online version more than any paper edition. So they are props. Am I not a Christian?

Book doesn’t act consistently with his beliefs. Do I act consistently with my beliefs? No, I don’t. And the Bible says that we won’t. “All have sinned.” That doesn’t just mean all non-converted or non-atoned people. It means everybody. I continue to sin, to slip, to do evil in small ways because they seem to me to be small. So did Book.

I agree that he was nothing like a preacher, as I would have expected. He was not a spiritual guide or a spiritual barometer.

The paper made a good point when it said he did not lead the people on the ship. He didn’t even quote the Bible, except to misuse it.

I wonder how much of the character of Book comes from the attitude of Glass. No, he didn’t change the words. But he decided to look with utter despair, in the episode where life support was failing. How you look when you say something, how you move, makes a lot of the characterization.

I know what Whedon said about him, but what if Book is just running? He’s not a Christian; his collar and his book are just props to keep him somehow safe.

Wow. I don’t think I can publish this discussion. I think it would be something that KJ and Ian would not like.

They say in the paper that no one can literally believe the Bible. It is flawed and we as humans (because we are so flawless) must fix it so that it will be an adequate guide. We should take out pages that we don’t like or write in new words where the old ones don’t fit. (20)

They argue that Book treats with Bible as without potential for subtlety. And as to the character Book, this may indeed be so. But the Bible is infinitely subtle, at least as much as a work of great literature is subtle. The symbolism, the allegory, the deeper meanings, all exist in the book.

But they argue that the subtlety is in taking from the Bible what you don’t like, what you think is illogical.

Now, I will state for the record that according to their definition, I am a fundamentalist. Does this mean I am an unintelligent, nonthinking human being running from my past? No. But they argue that it does. They argue that Book is a fundamentalist because he is running and looking at the Bible literally.

…I don’t think I am the kind of fundamentalist they are talking about. But it is certainly true that they are saying I am one.

It is also true that they, at least to some extent, do not know what they are talking about. (Re their definition of atonement and conversion. Re their objectification of fundamentalists and their generalizations about people who are fundamentalists.)

You know, they ought to read what fundamentalists believe before they decide to attack them. This is a straw man. The reading of fundamentalism is lacking subtlety.