Critical Rhetoric and Pedagogy: (Re)Considering Student-Centered Dialogue [7]
论文作者:Cathy B. Glenn 论文属性:短文 essay登出时间:2009-04-07编辑:刘宝玲点击率:30934
论文字数:6000论文编号:org200904070950182936语种:中文 Chinese地区:中国价格:$ 33
关键词:Critical Rhetoric and PedagogyStudent-Centered Dialoguemaster narrativesdemocratic cultureprinciple aim
ntext of rhetorical criticism, teachers, like critics, also choose what they will focus on, what aspects are emphasized, and those choices are innately influenced by what a teacher brings to teaching. In Dr. Wolf's case, her critical perspective is always already a part of her media choices, and it acts to frame the analysis she offers her students. Moreover, the controversial choices, in prompting diverse readings on her part and from her students' perspectives, demonstrate the constitutiveness of meaning making through discursive processes.
When choosing fragments of media to combine for presentation, Dr. Wolf assumes an active rather than passive role for her students as audience. As such, her juxtapositions of very different types of mediated fragments encourage her students to act critically by finding connections between them, particularly as they relate to their own lived experiences. It becomes necessary, then, to see beyond the surface meanings of individual fragments (e.g., nude bodies, sexual acts, war footage, etc.) when trying to locate how they might be related on a broader cultural level. Moreover, her choices reflect what McKerrow describes as a critical rhetoric that understands that media fragments may be interpreted as polysemic (containing many meanings), instead of simply representing the one obvious meaning that requires interpretation. Students are given the opportunity, through Dr. Wolf's own critical readings, to offer readings of their own “which contain the seeds of subversion or rejection of authority, at the same time that the primary reading appears to confirm the power of the dominant cultural norms” (McKerrow, p. 108).
An orientation, McKerrow explains, “is the least restrictive stage from which the critical act might be launched” (p. 102). In McKerrow's sense, the criticism rendered from this stage is not prescriptive; rather, it is a discursive process that serves to open up space for deciding what counts in making critical judgments. Contingently oriented criticism, rather than fixing a set of interpretations from which to choose seeks, instead, to open space by increasing the possibilities for creative interpretations. By extension, generation of interpretive options to status quo constructs becomes a creative process of critical invention. Dr. Wolf's political orientation, reflected in her oft-voiced critical analysis of various socio-political issues during her lectures, serve as a starting point for many of her students' own opinion-formation and critical development. For instance, her explicit capitalist critiques, her anti-censorship stance, and her feminist analysis of mediated body images trigger in her students responses that begin (or continue) the processes of critical consciousness development. Rather than serving to impose her own perspectives on her students, Dr. Wolf's opinions oftentimes trigger critique of them from her students (generally in the form of written feedback). Her students seem to catch her critical rhythm, so to speak, and undertake the act of criticism themselves. More than this, when asked to consider options for changing what might be viewed as damaging or oppressive mediated messages, Dr. Wolf's students offer creatively fashioned alternatives, the conception of which may have been less creative if not for the critical forum in which they are allowed to develop.
Finally, these aspects of critical rhetoric, performed by Dr. Wolf, seem to confirm McKerrow's notion th
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。