Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Refiguring Classroom Authority and the Ethics of Plagiarism
Andrea Lunsford and Rebecca Moore have written two insightful essays questioning two foundations of modern classrooms and teaching. It is amazing how many aspects of the pedagogical setting we accept as unassailable principles we are not worthy to question. Our society keeps moving along following a tradition that may or may not be in our own best interest. These writers issues of authority and plagiarism under a microscope and question whether our contemporary practices are really helping us achieve our goals in education.
Ms. Lunsford questions whether the traditional authority models in the classroom are continuing to be successful. She is critical of the "top-down" strategy currently employed, emphasizing the teachers authority on subjects and devaluing the student's contribution to the classroom. Authority is, by nature, judgemental and hierarchical. It places a greater value on one person's view and says the other is inadequate. She sees this as an obstacle to true learning and critical thinking. The author then makes a case for a new classroom ethos, based on "dialogue, mutual respect, and connectedness". Although this ideal is very tricky to achieve, it should be persistent even when it fails.
Ms. Howard questions whether our definition of plagiarism as a criminal act should be modified. Although she admits blatant academic dishonesty such as buying a paper or cheating on a test is a student ethics problem, she claims patchwriting has been wrongfully included in the same category. Patchwriting is a problem of teacher ethics for this author. Her prescription for it is not punishment, but further instruction on citation and understanding the text. Patchwriting can be a wonderful way to try on ideas and words with which a student may not be familiar, and it should be treated as a developmental stage in students as opposed to a criminal act. Proper citation and continuing to explore the source text for a better understanding should be pursued not F's.
Both of these articles offered me something for my future as a studio associate. It is a unique opportunity to try out the pedagogical ethos in the first article, working with a fellow student through dialogue and give and take. Also, it will be a chance to apply the issues of the second article in helping others identify when they are "trying-on" others language and how that can lead to a deeper understanding of language and help develop the skills to put their own thoughts into clear and concise words. I could use a little of that myself.
Ms. Lunsford questions whether the traditional authority models in the classroom are continuing to be successful. She is critical of the "top-down" strategy currently employed, emphasizing the teachers authority on subjects and devaluing the student's contribution to the classroom. Authority is, by nature, judgemental and hierarchical. It places a greater value on one person's view and says the other is inadequate. She sees this as an obstacle to true learning and critical thinking. The author then makes a case for a new classroom ethos, based on "dialogue, mutual respect, and connectedness". Although this ideal is very tricky to achieve, it should be persistent even when it fails.
Ms. Howard questions whether our definition of plagiarism as a criminal act should be modified. Although she admits blatant academic dishonesty such as buying a paper or cheating on a test is a student ethics problem, she claims patchwriting has been wrongfully included in the same category. Patchwriting is a problem of teacher ethics for this author. Her prescription for it is not punishment, but further instruction on citation and understanding the text. Patchwriting can be a wonderful way to try on ideas and words with which a student may not be familiar, and it should be treated as a developmental stage in students as opposed to a criminal act. Proper citation and continuing to explore the source text for a better understanding should be pursued not F's.
Both of these articles offered me something for my future as a studio associate. It is a unique opportunity to try out the pedagogical ethos in the first article, working with a fellow student through dialogue and give and take. Also, it will be a chance to apply the issues of the second article in helping others identify when they are "trying-on" others language and how that can lead to a deeper understanding of language and help develop the skills to put their own thoughts into clear and concise words. I could use a little of that myself.
# posted by bgrace @ 6:05 AM 
