Use this space to report on your personal research results. You should assemble a set of about 6 articles that comprise the conversation you're planning to join. Talk about what you're seeing there and how you'll use either key terms, opening gambits, or theoretical frames.
Report here, too, if you're having trouble locating appropriate articles and ask classmates for help, maybe, devising key terms, and so forth.
The assignment page for this week includes what to do about the Zimmerman database problems:
http://www.unm.edu/~sromano/english640/assign3.htm
Friday, February 8, 2008
Your Personal Research Area
Posted by Susan Romano at 2:07 PM
Labels: Personal Research
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
What follows are some random thoughts about people’s papers based on a classification of “fields of knowledge”:
a) the kind that is “out there” and you need to remind people of it
b) the kind that you create and present as “news”
What follows is not meant to be directive, that is, I’m not telling Tim or Candice what they should do, but rather speculating on what various knowledge moves might look like.
Tim’s project: First, what’s Tim’s central question about Montessori and rhetoric? I think she’s still working on that, but in the course of the conversation we talked about the need to establish that it’s a very popular choice, especially among educated parents and the question she might be exploring is why this is so. We speculated that there’s a dual attraction having to do with the desire for educational achievement coupled with the desire to give children lots of freedom of choice (deeply held American values, yes?). So this might be (a) knowledge—the kind that doesn’t need too much arguing for. But then again it might be (b) knowledge—in some need of more argument. So assuming (a), is she going to do a survey of parental beliefs? We talked about this possibility, but I think not. Take a look at the Jordan Jack article on Los Alamos (RSQ). This article begins by quoting some random people about why they’re visiting the Trinity site. So we might ask how random this really is? Is it fictional? (I don’t remember, actually—could be.) But let’s say it’s not fictional and that Jack has simply framed her argument with some real comments from real people. She’s established a kind of (a) knowledge—reminding people of what they will readily agree upon. Still, this reminder sets stage for the analysis (frames of community memory). So what would it look like if Tim talked to several parents at Montessori informally, asking them what they liked about Montessori and what their hopes were for their children? Or with the directors, who might actually be induced to comment on not on the pedagogy but on “what parents want.” Tim would hope for 2 things if she did this kind of talk gathering: some insights that she maybe didn’t have? Confirmation of her suppositions? A range of comments from which to launch her speculative questions about where Montessori education fits in the larger scheme of a rhetorical education.
Candice’s project: One thing Candice may do for the dissertation is look at the array of recent textbooks incorporating pedagogies for teaching visual literacy or visual rhetoric. She has an agenda, here, and it’s to be able to make statements about the current state of visual rhetoric pedagogy because she’s going to use this “current state” to launch an argument that we need to do something more/else. So one question is this: How does she make knowledge about the state of visual pedagogy (b)? Lots of answers would be right. She would have to decide how to carve out a sample (method): 5 years of publication across all publishers? 10 years? Most prominent authors only? Only texts at prominent rhetoric programs across the nation? Most cited in works-cited lists? Textbooks with the most comprehensive sections on visual? No right answers but her decisions do reflect methodology—or her sense of what counts as knowledge in this field. My sense is that she doesn't need to be all that thorough or systematic for rhet/compers. Decisions, however, would be determined by her own standards (she respects social science methodologies) and her sense of the field and the habits of the journal she might be publishing in. She might, for example, be so very thorough about this that her readers would not like to hear about it, or so random that they would object to major omissions. It’s also possible for Candice to become a real expert on the state of visual pedagogy per her own standards, and to use her knowledge quite selectively/rhetorically in a given article or paper. One article might be a report on her findings (b); another would “refer” to her study or reduce the findings to a couple of lines before moving on to a different kind of argument, suggesting to readers that they probably already knew that visual pedagogies were incoherent (a). Or she could spend time in between the two—much as the author of the gray literature paper did.
My project is on integrating the rhetoric of media into an English 101 class. Most of the first year writing programs have begun adopting WAC curriculums and many of the conversations about that talk about the difficulty English TAs and 101 teachers have in successfully implementing WAC sequences.
This is one area that could help with that since it draws on existing strengths of 101 instructors (rhetoric) and connects to communications, journalism, technology and new media.
The paper I envision will provide traditional modern rhetorical models (aka Burkian) for areas of media and new media (film, advertising, pop-culture television, YouTube, Social Networking sites, etc.).
An important aspect of the paper will be helping 101 instructors translate those analyses to college freshmen who are trying to shift from strictly bimodal communication and learning skills to multi-lateral analytical skills. Media and New Media are the bridge between the two.
It was difficult finding specific articles on this topic. No one has connected pedagogy and the rhetoric of media directly (that I could find). HOwever, there were several papers addressing specific rhetorical issues in advertising, pop-culture television, film, etc. that I can use for research in developing my paper. I'm going to cross reference those articles with additional journal articles on pedagogy techniques in freshman classrooms.
Of the articles I've come across so far, the conversations seems to share a common thread in their techniques of introducing the paper. Primarily, these papers use the introduction to bridge classical and modern rhetorical theory with media and new media. They often introduce the rhetorical theory or method, and then relate how media (either specific or general) and the study of media can benefit from the rhetorical theories. The papers then apply those theories to (typically) specific media images, advertising, news events, etc. to illustrate their points.
That's about as far as I've gotten so far. More to come as I examine the articles more thoroughly.
As Susan describes, I am focusing extensively on visual rhetoric which stems from the work I'm doing for my dissertation. My research is grounded to a large extent in the conversation about curriculum developed discussed in the Wardle and Downs article--recent calls for a 'Writing Studies' major. Here I'm attempting to take this further and basically say, "yeah, but 'writing' isn't just writing anymore. A 'Writing Studies' curriculum actually has to do a whole lot more than that." So then I have discuss what else it has to do, which gets way more complicated. I'm also doing a textbook analysis to see how the visual is taught and determine what's missing (another part of my argument is that visual rhetoric is taught either via tech writing 'principles of graphic design' or via visual analysis and that there's not much in between. I'm arguing that visual rhetoric is not actually taught 'rhetorically' (which, of course, I need to prove).
The trouble I'm having in terms of publishing for this class is focusing part of my dissertation for the Watson Conference for example. Per Susan's suggestion, I need to take one piece--either the survey or the 'something is missing' move and go with that.
My initial idea was to suggest a Pre-K through 12 education reform based on the theories of Montessori and the progymnasmata exercises as a foundation for a liberal/rhetorical college education; however, I have since come to understand, based on my readings and discussions with others, that this would be an exercise in futility. I don't want to follow I.A. Richards' example and attempt something that is probably impossible.
So, I am trying to reorganize my research and find something of relevance to say on the similarities between Montessori and the progymnasmata. Below are some of the directions I’ve been experimenting with… I would be happy to have any input regarding these ideas that you care to share.
Key Words: Montessori, Rhetoric, Democracy, Progymnasmata, Mastery, Imitation/Repetition
Why is Montessori such a popular choice among well-educated parents? (perhaps, as Susan noted, desire for educational achievement coupled with desire for freedom of choice/play – both deeply held American values and deeply held Montessori values) How is that relevant or important to rhetoric?
An analysis of rhetorical strategies in the Montessori Method.
A simple comparison piece-—suggest that Montessori education theory is very similar to or even based on the same philosophical and pedagogical concepts as progymnasmata.
Analyze function of democracy in both progymnasmata and Montessori.
Discuss value of imitation/repetition as pedagogical method to achieve mastery, using Montessori and Progymnasmata as examples
Maybe something on the idea that the Montessori Method is viewed as a progressive education theory; however, it bears a striking resemblance to classical rhetorical education—all this as a means of arguing for revitalizing classical rhetorical methods in modern education.
Or…
Argue that a thorough understanding of rhetorical strategies in a variety of genres leads to flexibility, creativity, and problem solving skills in all fields—-an education grounded in the Montessori Method and progymnasmata exercises can give students that kind of foundation.
Please forgive the bad grammar/syntax--I'm just throwing down some ideas, not very neatly.
First, I was asked to speak for the English Department's Southwest Symposium on February 29, 2008. There will be a panel with a flamenco dancer, a bilingual presenter, and myself. The topic for the symposium is 'identity: constructing the social self.' I plan to present the paper written for 542 on community memory of Bharata Natyam and how that affects identity.
Secondly, it might be great to be able to take the presentation and turn it into a paper for RSQ.
Central Question: How do we resolve (or how has second generation Indian diaspora) differences in community memory through the practice of dance/dance education?
Methods/methodology:
Anecdotes: from a variety of people and other scholars in dance
Not sure what else? Eventually, for my PhD research I intend to do detailed interviews with all my teachers about their 'memory' and experiences in dance/identity, my parents and other aunts/uncles from their generation about their memory and their second generation children.
Key Words: Collective memory, public memory, community memory, schism, rhetorics of memory,
Introduction: I think starting off with a narrative- especially because I draw on my own narrative throughout the paper. Or like in the LANL article, picking a quintessential quote from each of the groups (scholars, 1st and 2nd generation).
I have been writing in my log and the blog I'm creating about the dearth of information in one area of research. So here is my problem:
I'm looking at the postmodern influence on the church from as early as the 70s and 80s. Following the Jesus movement, many churches began to acknowledge a need for providing more relevance to their communities and congregations. Economic pressures played a role as well, and new churches began finding homes in strip malls, abandoned grocery stores, and other rental buildings. Building churches became more and more difficult and expensive.
Along the way, and giving some citation to the Jesus Movement, the emerging church movement began to happen on the internet. I find some deep connections--perhaps simply correlations--between the movement of churches out of their established rhetorical spaces and the emergence of this new internet faith community using the rhetorical space of the internet to allow for community building.
So. There is a lot of scholarship about the Jesus Movement and a lot of scholarship about the postmodern influence on the church and the resulting Emerging Church Movement. But there is nothing scholarly--and almost nothing popular--on the years in between. This tells me that it is an area in which new scholarship could certainly be offered.
This could be an entire dissertation! And I am only writing one chapter, comparing the movement of space in church community to the use of internet space in the Emerging Church. I'm hoping that I can use the Humanities form of research, relying heavily in this instance on argument.
Now I will need some serious help paring down to 6-8 of the more than 20 articles I have found for the rest of my work! I can't stop myself!
I didn’t get to post last week on time, so I will go ahead and do that now—not sure if anyone will actually see this.
I am interested in looking at what has been called a “tipping point” in an article by Preto-Bay and Hansen in the WPA journal. The idea of the tipping point is that populations of early college writing classes are shifting toward a much less traditional, monolingual, monocultural, middle class makeup. The question I have is how are we as instructors of early college writing (I’m imagining developmental or basic writing through English 102) going to respond.
As we discussed in class the other night, I will try to look at this through the lens of administering a writing program, but I think I also want to look at classroom practice. I think I can do this in terms of observing instructors in our school and the interactions I have with those instructors.
At the moment, one thing that is in my mind is what Paul Matsuda calls a “division of labor”, which I see as a hierarchy among ESL, developmental, and college level writing instructors. It seems we could work well together to solve some of the students’ problems, but the division of labor keeps up apart.
Another thing that interests me is the actual focus of the composition curriculum. It is certainly true that developmental and ESL writers usually need to work on grammar/ linguistic concerns, but should they be barred from college level work until their language use approximates the language use of a native speaker? Almost no one who teaches composition (at least those I’ve anecdotally observed and talked with) would answer yes, but I think there are a lot of things that go on in early college writing classes that may be based on biases related to a distaste for non-native English. I will draw on the work of Horner and Trimbur (English Only and U.S. College Composition) to give me some background for this part.
If my article tries to say that we are at a tipping point in terms of the population of our early college writing classes, and if it seems that some changes are called for, the question is what changes. An article by Zammel and Spack discusses the teaching of “ESOL Students Across the Curriculum”. I will also look more closely at other articles related to pedagogy and several from a special issue of the WPA related to second language writers.
Hello Everyone,
I'm still focused on writing about American Indian students and aspects of composition studies. More specifically, I will address developmental writing studies and continue to find through research that very little information exists in this area. There's lot of info on other students - Hispanics, Black students, but when it comes to AI students, I am realizing that more needs to be done in this area.
I have consulted works from some of the more famous writers like Min Zahn Lu, Bruce Horner, Mike Rose, and a former Professor and mentor, Dr. Laura Gray-Rosendale, who teaches at Northern Arizona University is an excellent resource in Basic Writing Studies. She asked another student and myself to co-author a piece which was published in the Journal of Basic Writing. But in talking with Dr. Gray-Rosendale, she agrees that there is a huge gap in American Indian basic writing studies. There is alot out there on education and literature and the AI, which puts me in a somewhat uncomfortable position. Being an AI academic, with varied interests in AI issues, I must think about what my people might think about such revelations in this area. It is difficult as it is to talk about having been labeled a basic writer many years ago. There's alot of negatives tied to labeling here.
But these are things to consider. Dr. Romano has opened up new sources, very valuable ones to include Malea Powell, an AI scholar and Professor at Michigan State University. There is also Scott Lyons who is continuing to produce more articles on AI's and the area of writing. He wrote one particular article, "Rhetorical Sovereignty: What do American Indians Want from Writing?" and I have had the opportunity in the past to trade initial ideas about "natives" and writing issues. He will continue to be a sought upon source for my work.
Lastly, in doing research and working on furthering my interests in this area, I also try to look at contemporary studies/articles in the field of composition studies to stay on top of what's happening in the field.
I'm copying part of this over from the Maps section since it belongs in here per this week's assignment. I've added my two targeted journal articles (or the closest thing I can get anyway) at the bottom:
My goal is to link two different areas of study: the use of new media as a teaching tool, and the effects of Participatory Media on youth culture.
Here is a brief Lit Review that I'll draw on to build the article:
Guy Dubord: Dubord wrote a novel in 1967 called The Society of the Spectable in which he predicts a worldwide audience focused on corporate controlled media carefully designed to keep us from learning the truth, and willing to watch whatever is put in front of us. It's a remarkably accurate prediction of our current system. Does participatry media undercut or contribute to the spectacle? Perhaps both. I think it's a good lead in to the rest of the article at least.
Andy Warhol: Of course, there is Andy Warhol's prediction that everyone gets 15 minutes of fame, and participatory media certainly confirms that vision, but I don't really think it adds to this argument as much as it distracts.
Those are the general knowledge elements, here are a few of the articles:
(DigiRhet.org) Teaching Digital Rhetoric: Community, Critical Engagement, and Application. This is a publication by DigiRhet.org that includes a number of contributors. It's based on a Digital Rhetoric course taught at Michigan State in 2004. The publication addresses two key questions: What is Digital Rhetoric? and How do reading and writing practices change in digital environments? I'll use some of the finiding from the research in this report to justify the inclusion of participatory media in Freshman Writing Programs.
Brown, M. Neill with Kari Freeman and Carrie Williamson. The Importance of Critical Thinking for Student Use of the Internet . This article examines the "absorption of postsecondary students with the Internet as a source of knowledge." It looks at how willing students are to accept Internet based information as factual without the skills to determine credibility. I'll use the findings of this articl in my discussion of the need for new media rhetoric discussions.
Finnegan, Catherine L. Technology: Revolutionizing or Transforming College. This is a short article on the uses of technology in college classrooms. It's effective background information.
Madden, Mary. Internet Penetration and Impact. April 2006. This is strictly research data on Internet usage among various age and cultural groups.
Naim, Moises. The YouTube Effect. This is an article about how YouTube has been an effective instrument as a force for social and political change. It includes example of how individuals are circumventing corporate-owned and/or government controlled media to provide news. It relates directly to the Chomsky/Dubord arguments in that it demonstrates the potential for participatory media. It will be helpful for justifying the need to teach participatory media rhetoric and practice in composition classes.
Trier, James. "Cool" Engagements with YouTube. This article actually appears in two parts. This article discusses the interaction that the public, and particularly teenagers, have with YouTube and other participatory media sites. It includes several examples that will be helpful in presenting my argument.
Targeted source texts:
Since I don't have access to the printed text of Computers and Composition, I'm using the available texts of Computers and Composition Online, which might actually offer a better opportunity for the paper since its interactive nature would allow me to feature the student video along with the article.
Parrot, Jill: Miltigenred, Mulimedia
Parrot, Jill: Multigenred Multicultural Multimedia: Materiality and Literacy in the Composition Classroom. This article examines various genres of Internet literacy from blogs to social network sites and discusses the reactions students have to them based on cultural backgrounds. It talks about communal understanding and the materiality of literacy. This is more of an overview of the kinds of literacies available in New Media and provides some great background and overview information.
Cushman, Ellen: Toward a Rhetoric of New Media: Composing (me)dia. This article offers an example of composing online media using multiple new media tools. The product is not quite the same as I am discussing in my article, but the process, rhetoric and pedagogies discussed in the article support many of my own arguments. It has some nice research behind it as well.
Article Summaries
Tom Pierce
I'm adding a lot here, but this is basically the research that I decided to focus on (and some details about it) to support my paper.
1) Horner, Bruce, and John Trimbur. “English Only and U.S. College Composition.” College Composition and Communication 53 (2002): 594-630.
This article briefly traces the history of college composition in the U.S. and explains why monolingualism is privileged over bilingualism on most campuses. Early on in the article there is a call for an international perspective on written English. The idea is put forward that monolingualism is both a faulty goal and xenophobic. The authors suggest that since teaching English with the current monolingual focus is a way of maintaining the status quo, continuing to do so is tantamount to saying U.S. culture is fine and the status quo should be maintained. Near the end of the article the “Development of different academic standards” is advocated; these should be “contingent, local, negotiated” (621). In terms of the work I want to do, this article is important in two ways. First, the history and background relating to the teaching of early college writing, and how the current state has been reached, is essential if I am going to speak about possible changes. I know there are more broad and exhaustive histories that I may refer to for more depth, but for this article I like the specific focus on the monolingual/ multilingual aspects of teaching composition. Second, the part near the end of the article, which suggests “different academic standards” could really help lead my article where I want to go with new ideas about pedagogy that is looking not only for error but also instances of positive transfer.
2) Matsuda, Paul Kei. “Basic Writing and Second Language Writers: Toward an Inclusive Definition.” Journal of Basic Writing 22 (2003): 67-89.
The question of where second language writers fit in with basic writers is the center of this article. Matsuda provides a history that traces ESL students’ inclusion in basic writing classes since the 1960s—with particular attention being paid to generation 1.5 students. The article uses many examples drawn from the work of Mina Shaughnessy and the journal she helped to found, the Journal of Basic Writing. The function of the examples in the article is to illuminate the conversation on basic writing and ESL that has been taking places over the last twenty years. This part focusing on the discussion in the field is extremely helpful to my article because it gives me a snapshot of an influential conversation’s development over time. Matsuda’s final suggestion is for all basic writing teachers to be prepared to work with ESL students (better yet, all teachers of college writing). There are several reasons why this article works to support what I want to put forward. The first thing is the simple fact that Matsuda is discussing ESL and Basic Writing together, and the fact that the lines are blurring. This, I think, is occurring at the 101 and 102 levels as well; these classes are becoming more and more mixes of monolingual/ multilingual students. The fact that these lines are blurring causes Matsuda to call for a more inclusive definition. My contention is that we should take it just a little further and have a more inclusive definition within all early college writing (developmental, first year writing, ESL).
3) Preto-Bay, Ana Maria, and Kristine Hansen. “Preparing for the Tipping Point: Designing Writing Programs to Meet the Needs of the Changing Population.” WPA: Writing Program Administration 30 (2006): 37-57.
The authors begin by asserting that the population of college writing courses has changed and will continue to change for the foreseeable future. The changes are described in terms of a more linguistically diverse group of students. The question of how best to deal with these changes is central to this article. The authors also ask how WPAs can alter programs when most don’t really know where we are in terms of pedagogy and program type. Since, according to the authors, there is not much detailed descriptive research on composition programs across the country, the authors decide to focus on what we do know. They advocate a modified rhetorical approach as a curriculum type that benefits multilingual classrooms, as opposed to a cultural or an expressivist approach. They also support collaboration between mainstream and L2 fields, and deep changes in the programmatic, pedagogical, and teacher training sense. This article first gives me the very important metaphor of a “tipping point”; I really like this and whether or not I explicitly use it, it has helped me to frame an argument. Also, since this was published in WPA the form and structure of the article teaches me a lot. As we have discussed in class, WPAs are practical and do not want the bulk of the article to be theoretical. I think my article has to have clear, practical applications.
4) Zamel, Vivian, and Ruth Spack. “Teaching Multilingual Learners Across the Curriculum: Beyond the ESOL Classroom and Back Again.” Journal of Basic Writing 25 (2006): 126-152.
The authors assert that it is the responsibility of all college instructors to aid ESOL students in acquiring English. Writing to learn is a powerful tool in this task, according to Spack and Zamel. The most useful part of this article for me is the explanation of the treatment of error in ESOL students’ writing. They have a lot to say about looking at ESOL students as riddled with linguistic deficiencies or, alternately, as having “complex multicultural competence[s]”, which can be a “positive resource” in the classroom. (135) The deficit model is challenged, and the idea that ESL pedagogy is pedagogy that is basically just good teaching, and thereby good for all students. Finally a quote from Mina Shaugnhessy urges teachers not to “remediate students” but to “remediate yourself”. In the long term, this article will be useful to me because even beyond this article I hope to continue to gain expertise in serving ESL students in non-ESL classes.
5) Shuck, Gail. “Combating Monolingualism: A Novice Administrator’s Challenge.” WPA: Writing Program Administration 30 (2006): 60-82.
In the first paragraph, this article sites the Horner and Trimbur article that I am using. The author presents herself as a “novice administrator” who hopes to avoid the monolingualism Horner and Trimbur warn against. Much of the article explains the context and sort of day-to-day life of the author as she struggles to “combat monolingualism” at Boise State. She argues for more faculty who have L2 writing expertise, and advocates the following: cross-cultural composition (credit-bearing) ESL writing courses, “educating faculty” (teacher training), and a faculty liaison program—so designated faculty across the campus become ESL experts for the people in their disciplines. The article concludes with a list of classroom strategies drawn from ESL students and the ESL advisory committee at Boise State. The useful part of this article is looking at someone trying to position himself or herself without an extensive background as a WPA. Also, the fact that this article was published with suggestion for teachers/ WPAs (in the WPA journal) based on research from other journal articles and books and the author’s own experiences and reflections. She did not conduct studies or analyze texts or statistics.
6) Matsuda, Paul Kei. “Composition Studies and ESL Writing: A Disciplinary Division of Labor.” College Composition and Communication 50 (1999): 699-721.
This article provides a great history of the professionalization of TESOL, and traces how composition and TESOL developed and moved in different directions. Much of the development of the pofessionalization of TESOL began in the late 1930’s with President Roosevelt’s “Good Neighbor Policy”(one more reason for me to appreciate FDR’s presidency). I was surprised to see that I.A. Richards was one of the two people who made promising proposals to the State Department on the teaching of ESL. Charles C. Fries proposal actually won out, and with grant in hand Fries established the English Language Institute at Michigan University in 1941. From that point on, TESOL (since it was becoming professional in its own right) and composition studies began moving further and further apart.
The article also provides a lot of ideas on why it is important for composition teachers to have some knowledge of ESL students and how to work with these students in the writing class. Also, there are suggestions for professional development and pedagogy, and a section for WPAs. I think this article is required reading for anyone who wants to know more about serving ESL students in writing classes.
Below is a brief description of some of the articles from the "conversation" I am planning to join.
Fleming, David J. “The Very Idea of a Progymnasmata.” Rhetoric Review, 22(2), 2003, 105-20.
In this article, Fleming argues for a second (or hundredth) look at the progymnasmata, not for the exercises themselves, but for the value of the ideas behind those exercises.
Fleming, David J. “Rhetoric as a Course of Study.” College English, 61(2), November 1998, 169-191.
In this article, Fleming describes three definitions of rhetoric: anthropological, technological, and paideutic. He favors the third, which elevates rhetoric to a deep-rooted and practical knowledge or inherently virtuous skill.
Miller, Carolyn.
“Aristotle’s “Special Topics” in Rhetorical Practice and Pedagogy.” Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 17(1), Winter 1987, 61-70.
Carolyn R. Miller argues for the resurrection of the “Special Topics,” as a means of rescuing rhetoric from an inferential perspective that separates it from the substantive issues it was meant to address. Referencing Michael Leff, Miller describes a materialistic perspective that “treats rhetoric as an art enmeshed in varying particular circumstances and issues that determine the nature of persuasion” (63).
Corbett, Edward P.J. “The Theory and Practice of Imitation in Classical Rhetoric.” College Composition and Communication, Vol. 22(3), October 1971, 243-250.
Corbett argues for the use of imitation as a means to internalize structure, using numerous examples from classical Greece to contemporary pedagogical practices.
Cossentino, Jacqueline. “Ritualizing Expertise: A Non-Montessorian View of the Montessori Method.” American Journal of Education, 111(2), 211-244.
In this article, Cossentino uses the lens of ritual theory as a means to examine Montessori teaching practices.
Cossentino, Jacqueline. “Big Work: Goodness, Vocation, and Engagement in the Montessori Method.” Curriculum Inquiry, 36(1), 63-92.
In this article, Cossentino examines the rhetorical construct of the term work as it is used in the Montessori Method.
In addition to the articles above, I have a large stack of additional articles from my “conversation” to review. I would also like to read Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, but I won’t have time before I have to revise my article again.
Post a Comment