Great Composers Steal

Great Composers Steal

by Karen Hamilton - Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 03:08 PM
In this week’s discussion post we are asked what the implications of moving from a culture where the emphasis has shifted from “I know” to “We know” where our truths are the result of collective investigations. In the Google Tech Talks video (Oct 8, 2007) Everything is Miscellaneous, David Weinberger talks convincingly about how our systems of organization can limit information. He also talks about “publically negotiated knowledge” and how sometimes the people on the mailing list on websites know more than the experts. When we look at Dewey’s organization and consider the kinds of ways that we can connect information on the net, I think most of us would have to agree that the miscellaneous approach of the net just makes sense.



After viewing the required Weinberger video, of course the miscellaneous nature of the web led me to click on and view another video “Everything is Miscellaneous- Talking to David Weinberger (Nov 29, 2007). In this short video Weinberger goes on to say specifically that the nature of kids learning is collective and collaborative but teachers are grading individually. He also suggests that teachers should stop just sending kids off to libraries; rather they should send kids off on their own to wherever and then really talk about the sources they come back with. He goes as far to say that in the future, “We’ll give up print, like that!” While those like Nicholas Carr continue their foreboding rant about how we are all just getting superficial and stupid, Weinberger embraces the miscellany of it all.




After reading Parry’s Chronicle interview with Nicholas Carr, I surfed over to Carr’s blog Rough Type, read a few posts and hyperlinked myself over to Steven Pinker’s Mind Over Mass Media where upon Pinker takes on Carr’s view. But Carr’s blog, also alerted me to his recent appearance on Steven Colbert’s Colbert Report. Lucky me, with so little time to watch TV, there it was on my PVR, so my next step was watching Carr on the Colbert Report. Of course my favourite part of the interview was after Carr was going on about how multimedia makes us stupid, Colbert shouted out, “Bull s..t!” I’m with Colbert.

Now what’s the reason for describing my excursion? To me it illustrates the power of the miscellaneous nature of the web. Oh the places we can go and the things we can see. Could any of it have happened at a library? Did it make me stupid?

All these things speak to the issues involved in our case study this week.

Walter was a student who didn't follow the rules, instead of writing about music he created a detailed mashup that demonstrated a deep understanding of music and defended his submission in writing.

In my brief and earlier post I posted my reply to Walter as this:

"Walter your grade is A+ Not only have you found a unique way to complete the assignment in a deep and meaningful way but from your passionate and well written defense of your work, I can see you are a thoughtful and accomplished writer. I'll be happy to read more of your writing in future assignments."

I’ll now explain why I’m sticking to that. First of all, as an experienced college teacher who has spent at least half of my 20 years teaching Communications courses and the co-author of a recent college English textbook, I think I have a pretty good eye for a good writer. Walter is a good writer and if a high school student can so eloquently defend his point of view and if his everyday vocabulary includes words like ‘bricolage” then he’s not someone who I as a teacher need to worry about developing writing skills. He has them. For me my job would be to encourage him to use them more and to do that my words to him here praise his writing ability. I’m not sure if Walter knows how good a writer he could be, but I’m sure of one thing by the end of my course, he would be writing more.

My second point for why Walter deserves an A+ is that he really understood the assignment. How much can one write about music without hearing it? I’m sure the rest of the class wrote some lovely essays about how music shapes the view of America through melody and patriotism, but how many of them actually listened to music? How many of them took those ideas and created something new? How many of them will keep their essays or remember them in the future. How much learning stuck? The required composition to me is as much about music as it is about words and words without music are not quite enough. This assignment calls out to multimedia.

My third point is that Walter truly understands the nature of composition. It is evident in the production and in his defense of his project. He knows how to develop a well thought out argument; his arguments are clear and backed up with evidence and documentation; he’s persuasive and he’s passionate. Are these not the attributes of a good writer or creator?

Walter too understands the nature of creativity at a deep level. When he suggests that everyone is just producing variations from other themes, he sees the deep connection to the past. How much of music is original? My favourite example of how music builds from the past is a video posted at the Center for the Study of the Public Domain ( http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/ ), under the link Great Composers Steal http://realserver.law.duke.edu/ramgen/framed/kelley.rm composer Anthony Kelley shows how everything from classical to jazz is very much derivative.

We could also argue that Walter did exactly as asked. His work had over 3000 words, was a composition and it showed how Music shapes a view of America.

What’s the big picture? In communications courses, it is about communicating; often the stress is on writing and speaking. Can Walter write? I’d have to say, yes. With encouragement, I have no doubt he will write much more than what was required in that essay.

What our educational systems have to do is encourage the Walters, not alienate them.


References/Resources
Center for the Study of the Public Domain, Duke University Law. Retrieved from http://www.law.duke.edu/cspd/

Everything is Miscellaneous (Oct 8, 2007). GoogleTechTalks:Youtube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3wOhXsjPYM

Everything is miscellaneous –Talking to David Weinberger .(Nov 29, 2007). Infonomia:YouTube Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5z1O5v4hQM

Kelley, Anthony. Great composers steal. Retrieved from http://realserver.law.duke.edu/ramgen/framed/kelley.rm

Parry, M. (July 4, 2010). Is technology making your students stupid? Linkedin with: A writer who questions the wisdom of teaching with technology Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Is-Technology-Making-Your/66128/

Pinker, S. (June 10, 2010). Mind over mass media. New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/11/opinion/11Pinker.html

What do Marks Mean?

The Problem or is that Opportunity of Huck Finn

by Karen Hamilton - Tuesday, June 22, 2010, 03:28 PM

The case study presented with the multiracial group of students who created a multimedia version of a final project on Huck Finn rather than the individual written report required is certainly complicated on many levels. In many respects, the case study, the subject matter and the writing in the novel reflect on many of the issues inherent in The New London Groups 1996 paper, A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures.

In the novel it is evident that both Huck and Jim are intelligent but uneducated. The language they use is considered “unsivilised.” On the other hand, the so-called civilized characters act in less than civilized ways. The journey of the main characters represents an authentic education to the characters. The book both presents and creates a number of moral dilemmas. Because of the portrayal of its characters and its racially charged language, it has become a controversial book and its use in education has often been challenged.

Can an assignment that asks students to read the book and write a summary on their own reflect the complexity of the book? Are all of the students mature enough to deal with the multilevel racial issues on their own? I think not. This is my first dilemma with the assignment.

Perhaps how the students took on the project as a group and illustrated the ideas in Huck Finn speaks to the lack of forethought in the original assignment. Did the students feel a need to discuss and work together? As the New London Group states, “Our view of mind, society and learning is based on the assumption that the human mind is embodied, situated and social.” (A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies, 1996) To me, this book is not one to be taken on alone, and left to a book report. What the students who decided to create a multimedia project did was most real and authentic. Not only did they create an interesting multimedia project, but they were also critical and questioned Twain’s portrayal of race. A discussion of the portrayal of race is something that needs to happen with a controversial book like this. Their use of Hip Hop to illustrate the book is interesting especially since it, like the language in the book, is often controversial.

To me, what these students created was similar to what the London Group asks. “Multiliteracies also create a different kind of pedagogy, one in which language and other modes of meaning are dynamic representational resources, constantly being remade by their users as they work to achieve their various cultural purposes.” These students redesigned, to use the language of the New London Group, much like today’s students who create mash-ups to re-envision the then and the now. Their learning was authentic and meaningful.

Having defended the work of the group, I have to now ask what was the purpose of the assignment? In my college, our courses have clearly defined outcomes and assignments should link to outcomes. Was the outcome here for students to gain a deeper understanding of the book and to use critical thinking skills to analyze it? If this is the outcome, then the outcomes have been met. If, however, the outcomes of the assignment were the above plus also to demonstrate in writing using standard writing, grammar, spelling, punctuation and bibliographical format, then the writing portion has not been met. If this were the case, I would call the students in to discuss how valuable the project was and to ask them how they would meet the last outcome. In my experience, asking students what should happen usually leads to the best solution because they are the ones who decide on what exactly it should be. In this case, any written work submitted would be individual. Perhaps this written work would explain how their project led each of them to a deeper understanding of the book, the issues and how it is relevant to them today. This request should not be presented as a penalty but as a chance to get the highest mark that it sounds to me like they deserve.

In real life, this most likely wouldn’t have happened to me because all of my assignments have options for more creative delivery. The courses I teach relate to media, and today that necessitates more than a flat text driven assignment. The above teacher though, might want to reflect on the assignment and create an assignment that involves social discussion, reflection and a multi literacy approach.

I hadn’t really thought about Mark Twain and Huck Finn for a long time, so it sent me back to do a bit of re-reading and also to look into the controversy of the book. In my journey, I came across Peaches Henry’s 1992, 8200-word essay The Struggle for Tolerance: Race and Censorship in Huckleberry Finn detailing the controversy. In her thorough and thoughtful essay she brings out many sides to the controversy but she concludes:

“The insolubility of the race question as regards Huckleberry Finn functions as a model of the fundamental racial ambiguity of the American mind¬set. Active engagement with Twain's novel provides one method for students to confront their own deepest racial feelings and insecurities.”

For me, active engagement with Twain’s novel is precisely what occurred when the students created a multimedia view of Huck Finn. They deconstructed the novel and reconstructed it in a way that was meaningful and relevant. If my students do that, I am more than happy.

What is it that we share in common?

We share a common goal to communicate and to question, and to make and create meaning of this thing we call life.


References
Cazden, C., Cope, B. Fairclough, N., Gee, J. et al. (Spring 1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures, Harvard Educational Review; 66, 1 Research Library pg. 60.

Henry, Peaches. (1992). The Struggle for Tolerance: Race and Censorship in Huckleberry Finn, Satire and Evasion: Black Perspectives on Huckleberry Finn. Retrieved from http://homepages.wmich.edu/~acareywe/huck.html