Across the Curriculum
at Albuquerque TVI Community College
Archive of Teaching Ideas: Teaching tip for May 25-June 1, 1999
Patrick Houlihan's tip
Share your ideas
Send your feedback
Featured on this website:
Discussion
Forum
The following is a collaborative technique that involves students in defining the characteristics of an art form they are about to practice. However, this teaching idea could work to involve students in analyzing products or concepts in chemistry, nursing, and other fields as well.
This idea comes from Patrick Houlihan, English/Journalism instructor, who has used this questioning technique to draw from students what they already know intuitively about a subject and to frame the semester's work in terms of a critically questioning perspective.
Rather than lecturing, I asked creative writing students on the second day of my sophomore level poetry class to define some of the key characteristics of poetic writing. At first, a few timid hands rose as basic qualities of poetry, such as rhyme, meter, and metaphor, were identified. While students spoke, I compiled a list of characteristics on the chalkboard, occasionally asking for clarification and further explanation when students mentioned such concepts as "a heightened awareness" or "powerful language."
As the discussion went on, students soon dispensed with hand-raising in favor of a more spontaneous dialogue about the various distinguishing features of a given poetic quality and the inevitable interrelationships of terms and concepts. We had an excellent discussion about what poetic writing entails. Our talk led to a tangential discussion of numerous artistic endeavors. I hadn't planned to discuss other art forms yet, but the student-generated analysis greatly enhanced our understanding of the form of art we were about to practice. Ironically, I had brought in a number of dictionary definitions (in case students were stumped by my question) that we then checked against the list of characteristics we had "discovered." We found most key features of the pre-fabricated definitions mentioned in our own defining characteristics and were able to laugh at some of the more redundant, circular dictionary definitions.
Analysis: The students are asked to analyze what constitutes poetic writing by listing the characteristics of the genre and the interrelations of those artistic qualities.
Synthesis: By generating a list of specific characteristics of poetry, the students begin to create a critical vocabulary with which to critique their own and other writers' poetry.
Evaluation: Ongoing evaluation of poetry throughout the semester (and beyond) is better facilitated by using some agreed upon critical characteristics instead of the "I liked it (or not)" ilk of responses to works of art. Workshop poems can then be evaluated for their effective or ineffective use of poetic qualities.
Creativity: Student writers are free to use the characteristics in various combinations to compose their own poems and poems that mimic another writer's form or content. Each new group of writing students is allowed and encouraged to define its poetics on its own terms (although a predictable range of critical terms are sure to arise). This shows there isn't one fixed set of artistic criteria used to evaluate poetry, and it shows the flexibility inherent in language.
Decision Making: Students can then write with a more conscious set of poetic tools, deciding which poetic features to use, when to use them, and how to judge their results.
Hypothesizing/Predicting: Students better understand the value of writing within the constrictions of established poetic forms, knowing their poems will, at the very least, display poetic qualities whether they are ultimately deemed successful poems or not.
Applications: Besides deriving criteria for evaluating poetic works, students can apply many of the qualities and characteristics in a broader sense to other forms of art, and can understand the need for a critical vocabulary in order to form a well-reasoned judgment of any work of art.
Relevance: Students get involved in critical thinking almost effortlessly, and they realize that they do know quite a bit about the world of art even if they've never tried a particular form before. They see the need to think critically and creatively in order to create effective works of art.
Learning Style: The activity is largely auditory and visual. Though I don't require it, most students copy the list as we make it on the board, so the kinesthetic element of writing is also involved.
Real-life: The critical approach to art involved in this activity is readily useable in any artistic activities that these students may encounter, from critiquing a film they see to evaluating an art exhibit or even a meal in a restaurant. Students develop a clearer sense of aesthetic judgement when they have to define their evaluative criteria before they evaluate or create a work of art.
Adaptability: Asking the question, "What are the characteristics of (poetry, pottery, sculpture, lithography, etc.)?" can generate useful framing discussions if asked about biology, psychology, geometry, history, and so on. Extending the inquiry into other humanities and the sciences helps students understand each field's purviews, patterns, and values better. With a clearer vision of the big picture, any area of study is easier to grasp and to master.
If you've tried this teaching idea or some version of it, please let us know how it worked. Got suggestions for improving it?
If you have a tip, technique or assignment that has worked successfully in your classroom to elicit active thinking, please share it. .
|
|
| . | |
|
|
. |
|
|
