Discourse Analysis Paper

Improvements in writing

I have always prided myself on being literate and well versed in my writings. Communicating my ideas effectively and intelligently in a such a way as they are understood as I intended them to be is my ultimate goal as a writer and one which I feel I have come very close to reaching. I pour my heart into what I write because I believe in it and am passionate about the subjects I discuss. Reading the chapters from Writing Analytically and the excerpt from Wysocki has given me new tools in the process of analyzing and selecting credible sources for my research. While this is something I practiced on my own every time I looked into a topic, it has allowed me to refine that process and look a little deeper into how something is being said and why the person is saying it. Previously, I had understood that most people write to express themselves and their ideas, thus making almost every paper opinionated and therefore subject to personal bias and agenda. I was naturally cautious when reading something which made very strong, all encompassing statements, as this was always a sign of someone pushing their personal views. Often using selective evidence or relying on faith based arguments. Being interested in politics and politically charged topics I ran into this issue frequently while researching source material. I ended up using many of the techniques from Writing Analytically and Wysocki to judge my sources credibility and initiate “discussions” between my sources if I felt they provided good dialogue. What the readings have influenced in my writing is how I approach the research and the process I go through when selecting a source. Instead of amassing a mountain of evidence that I then sift through for information, I am much more efficient and effective when I use lateral research. I can more easily find relevant information that has a common thread and use it in formulating my own position.

Another area that these assignments have assisted me in is in my recognition of “authors’ purpose”. I have always noticed a tone or “sound” when I read an article, I have a much deeper understanding of how and why that tone is there and how it is intended to influence the reader. I can more effectively recognize visual tactics and effects as well and how they interact with or influence the main topic of discussion. I had a coach who always said “The biggest room in the world is the room for improvement”, and after these readings and assignments I agree. I have seen my writing improve with every bibliography and discourse; I have begun to utilize the power of online media and refined my process for source selection. All these improvements surprised me as I came into this class not expecting to really learn anything new about research or multimedia or writing. I honestly had about four papers already written about various topics of which I hold interest, to be turned in at the scheduled time with the proper citation etc etc. nothing about this class is what I expected from an English class, and I believe that my writing style has improved because of it.

Discourse Analysis Paper

In the course of researching for articles, videos and academic papers pertaining to my topic of our cultural restrictions on child creativity I came across a large movement that I had no idea existed. This movement consists of a newer generation arguing for a reform of the current educational system. The argument is that the standardized educational system we have today was built to meet the needs of the Industrial Revolution and it places emphasis on the skills that were required at that time (Sir Ken Robinson). This system literally educates the creativity out of children; it teaches that we should always have the right answer to questions and that that mistakes are the worst thing to make (Diana Laufenberg). This breeds a fear of mistakes and brings ridicule from peers when mistakes are made. So here is my question to the idea that mistakes are bad: how many mistakes did Thomas Edison make when inventing the light bulb? Where would our world be today if we didn’t have mistakes to learn from? Getting it wrong and learning from the consequences are natural parts of the education process. By creating an environment which teaches that mistakes are wrong we teach children to avoid doing something unless they know they can get it right the first time, attempting to completely avoid making mistakes leads to a loss of innovation and creativity.

The idea presented by Diana Laufenberg, and supported by several of my sources, is that we should be allowing children to make mistakes and instead of labeling them as wrong or incorrect, we lead children to understand that mistakes are part of life and to learn from them, not avoid them. This mentality coincides well with the topic I originally began researching: free form playgrounds and adventure parks. Because the creativity of children is so evident in play, playgrounds should be designed around spontaneous and unstructured play (Shell, Spies). The link is that “all children are born artists” (Pablo Picasso) and our educational system as well as our idea of “structured play” educate the creativity out of them. All the sources I found advocate the idea that systems should be designed around not what we as adults grew up with or think is the “correct way”, but a modern and realistic approach to the innovations in the world and the effect they have on those systems. This applies to our standardized educational system as much as it does playgrounds. The core argument from Sir Ken Robinson, as well as the rest of my sources, is one of change: change to the current mentality of education, change to the current infrastructure and change to the use and incorporation of technology. We have seen this in the new adventure parks with “loose materials” and in the new e-schools, where kids in middle school and high school can attend online education instead of brick and mortar institutions.

Moreover, a talk given by Adora Svitak demonstrates what children have to teach adults; unburdened by reality and the restrictions life places on the older generations thinking, children are idealistic and dream of perfection. She goes on to defend this as an important aspect to human advancement: “In order to make anything a reality, you have to dream about it first.” A profound statement coming from a thirteen year old and one which adults tend to dismiss because we all know that dreams aren’t reality: reality is hard work and tangible results. This mode of thinking is old school and for the technological age, outdated. Our country is no longer in the industrial revolution; linearity and conformity in our educational system suppress dreams and creativity (Sir Ken Robinson). The focus is on going through a process and eventually to college when college isn’t for everyone. A great example given was of a man who wanted to become a firefighter. He was publicly ridiculed by his professor because he didn’t want to go on to college. That man became a firefighter and through an ironic twist of fate, ended up saving that professors life and the life of his wife. Each source I found shared this one common idea: that human talent is as diverse as the human race and educating that diversity requires flexibility and a fundamental revolution in our educational system. Everything must change: how we teach, what we teach, where we teach.

What I found even more surprising is that all these sources agree on the solution as well as the problem: let education flourish on its own. Give children the tools to create their own world and they will astonish you. If left alone with the proper tools and educational materials kids will teach themselves what they want to know. A stunning and remarkable example of this is a study done in the poorest areas of India by scientist Sugata Mitra. He placed a computer in a wall in these villages and left it there. Within two years, having zero experience with computers, the children in these areas were able to browse the internet, download programs, and learn about bio technology in a completely foreign language (I’m not making that up). In one amazing case, after only four hours, children who had never been exposed to a computer before were able to record and play back their own music. He makes a point: if there is an interest, education will happen.

All of these sources have a positive tone and message embedded within their presentation. They are all backed by quality research, mountains of evidence and a shared optimism about the future. Reading and listening to these sources it is hard not to become emotionally charged; these are far reaching goals, radical ideas and they challenge the current system of thought. What is more, being backed by so much scientific data, they are possible. A common thread that can be drawn from this discussion is that the task ahead is large and difficult, a wall of red tape, ingrained ideology and a cultural resistance to change. Years of reforms and restructuring are required to even begin teaching in this new method or building schools to facilitate it. A century of dogmatic practice has to be undone; the old guard has to be convinced of the credibility of these ideas. However, they promote the idea that it can be done.

“Brick walls allow us to demonstrate our commitment to our goals.”

-Randy Pausch, Last Lecture

Works Cited

Articles:

• Shell, Ellen Ruppel. "Kids Don't Need Equipment, They Need Opportunity." Smithsonian Magazine, July 1994. Reprinted by permission of the Smithsonian and Ellen Ruppel Shell. Web 6 February 2011. http://www.pps.org/articles/kids_smithsonian/

• Spies, Greta et al. "The risk is that there is 'no risk': a simple, innovative intervention to increase children's activity levels." International Journal of Early Years Education 17.1 (2009): 33-45. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 19 Feb. 2011 http://web.ebscohost.com.libproxy.boisestate.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?hid=105&sid=877c8e70-a148-4cfc-9301-3d4d99a5eaa3%40sessionmgr112&vid=7

TED talks videos:

· Adora Svitak. “What Adults can Learn From Kids.” Filmed February 2010. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/adora_svitak.html

· Diana Laufberg. “How to Learn? From Mistakes.” Filmed November 2010. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/diana_laufenberg_3_ways_to_teach.html

· Sir Ken Robinson.

o “Bring on the Learning Revolution!” Filmed February 2010. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html

o “Schools Kill Creativity.” Filmed February 2006. http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

· Sugata Mitra. “The Child-driven Education.” Filmed July 2010. http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education.html