Since when did composition become so sci-fi? This article, "The not-so-distant future: Composition studies in the culture of biotechnology", by Michelle Sidler seemed so far fetched; however, the further I read, the more I began to think about the future of education and its possible paths. Technology is definitely impacting the classroom, from computers to cell phones, to ipods, etc. We as teachers have had to adapt to the changes technology has brought. We have seen computers already become smaller (i.e. the iPhone, blackberries, Internet accesses on a cell phone), but the idea that biology will no longer be sacred is a scary idea.
Teachers prove to still be an informational source to students in the classroom. I don't think teachers can be replaced 100% by technology, but I do agree that we will need to adapt to the changing needs our society and culture will create. As composition teachers we will need to learn a new language to prepare our students for a productive, lucrative and successful future if we go in the direction Sidler predicts. Will literature we teach change, the style of writing transform, and the language we speak mutate? Probably, according to Sidler. In section four: a brief introduction to the genome, the construction of a genome is compared to the chapters of a book; that is a very interesting comparison. Moving from one-dimensional to multi-dimensional writing is what science advancement is causing our culture to do. How are we going to adapt in a composition classroom? Do we then start to transform our teaching to fit the society? Today we are no longer changing students into what we want them to be, but we are changing society to fit what they want it to be: faster, more advanced, and indulging. Why should we continue to teach "The Bard" when it won't be needed in 20 years?
I know that sounds pretty petty, but I believe what Sidler is really saying is we need to adapt, as we have been since the dawn of time, to changes in our world in order to survive. We need to look at teaching students skills such as interpreting, comprehending, synthesizing, and researching texts in order for them to have the ability to decode, dissect, and learn new ideas. Someday writing with pen, paper, and pencil will become archaic and these tools will be seen in a museum; but until then, we need to use them to help create and mold the skills future generations will use when biotechnology and composition become a reality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree with what you have said here. I think that Sidler has made some interesting points, I also enjoyed the comparison of a gene to a book, but I think that some of the things she has brought up are quite a leap. The changes that she discussed cannot be directly credited to a single advancement.
ReplyDeleteYou are right on in terms of how we need to be able to adapt to the changes that do occur. I think that this is one area in which teachers are become more proficient than they have been in the past. Modern teachers seem to be more willing to evaluate new technologies and techniques and adapt them to the neeeds of their students. We will learn the new languages, master the new technologies and adapt to the world as quickly as is becomes beneficial to our students.
Nic, I like what you said about teachers becoming more proficient at adapting; I think that's the thing, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteAs teachers, we must also see ourselves as students who are open-minded, flexible, continuously learning - no matter what technology looks like.
As far as not teaching "The Bard," however, Shaynee - I hope that is not true. Maybe, the more we learn about our genetics, the more we will be able to understand why reading Shakespeare touches us, and we'll be better able to teach it!