This post marks a different point in my education as a student of CogSci, Education and English. So please, take the posts before with a grain of salt, seeing as I departed highly from an academic tone which often we frown upon and I am afraid will stain my credibility. However, I no longer want to hide and deny the person and writer I once was. I am constantly evolving and believe in "emerging thinking," meaning that not all writing, speech or text needs to be perfectly polished. Instead, this is a safe place for me to think about my topics in a pattern of speech that makes sense to my audience, mostly me and my two outstanding directors whom I cannot thank enough!
I am working on my Senior Honors thesis concerning a study on Jane Austen and reading attention with the focus on English education.
I was asked why do I want to do this. I've been fumbling around for the right answer, and I'm starting to think it's many.
After a great semester with Dr. Phillips, I am really interesting in studying the brain. There is so much that we don't know about it, but I believe that the more we study and know it, the better we can manipulate it to do the things we want it to do.
I am highly invested in English Education. A running theme through my courses at MSU has been teaching has no formula because the classroom changes everyday due to external and internal factors. So I've been on a mini-quest to see how we as a collective teach. Are there running patterns throughout our American or even global classrooms? This search is problematic because ascribing a formula to teaching can make it into that which we do not want it to be: detached from students, teacher-centered and most of all...boring! In my study of CogSci, I want to look at how understanding the brain's functions can deepen, or improve, the classroom.
Looking back to high school junior year, I did my big research essay on how school is killing students. And you know what, I really think I was on to something. "Teaching with the Brain in Mind" by Eric Jensen makes a point to note that high schoolers have different sleep patterns than the current school system, thus we end up with sleepy teens in our class. I made this point in my research paper (though far less eloquently and with considerable more angst) and I still believe that today. If we start to integrate new knowledge into the schools, I really believe we can start to teach to students better.
There is also this linguistic divide that has always bugged me. How can teachers access new data coming out if the language is written not written for them but really is important to them? I will explore the challenges I face in writing for multiple audiences, as well as this whole formatting thing, which I believe is a frustrating social construction, but I have to deal with it. I want to be present in my writing because it does not try to hide the fact that I will inherently be biased no matter how hard I try, especially concerning new subject combinations that have less scholarly quotes to plop in.
This taboo divide between science, education and English is really no longer relevant in our highly connected society. Each subject can enhance the other. Humanities can humanize the sciences, sciences can qualify the humanities. The issue of these products is where our future lies. Above all, I believe in the promise of the future that comes from the hard work of today. I realize that my particular interest of study may stomp on some toes, but my study raises questions about each of these subject areas that may have never been raised before.
In the process of trying to answer these questions, we get a deluge of new questions. That space of delightful ignorance is where we grow and improve.
As of this moment, the thesis is: What questions for the
English secondary classroom does this study of modes of reading
attention in Jane Austen raise?
This thesis is strong because it focuses on questions, not answers.
This thesis is weak because it's not really specific and it just doesn't sit right with me.
I
may have been taught this, but I mostly found it out myself after
writing 20-30 papers at the collegiate level: write your paper first and
then your thesis. For this project, the two instances may not be so
distinct. Instead, I see it more as a simultaneous development; as one
side evolves, so does the other.
Coming up soon: After reading the PhD student's essays, I want to talk about
1. Almost all noted things on needing to annotate text while reading; what does this mean for teaching reading strategies in the classroom?
2. How brainstorming affects essay
3. Why the researchers asked if the subjects had taught any course and what are the implications there
4. Essay content: lots of focus on Edmund/Fanny and education/intelligence
