OVERVIEW: Louise Rosenblatt and Frank Smith make similar arguments from very different perspectives: Rosenblatt, writing as a teacher for teacher, talks about the conditions surrounding excellent reading and argues for why teaching literacy is important and vital. Smith, writing as a psycholinguist, is interested in explaining what our body (our eye, our brain) is doing when we read, what fluent reading looks like, and why it is good for our bodies.
WHAT TO POST: For this discussion board post, please do two things . . . 1. In your summary and analysis, please identify the ways these two theorists compliment each other in terms of their ideas--in what ways are they similar? Be specific here. Use their terminology as you connect one theorist to the other. 2. Think back to your experience reading Gertrude Stein's Tender Buttons. How would Rosenblatt and Smith explain what happened there--both the initial fear and loathing and the ultimate meaning making you experienced during the process. Here again, try to use the terminology of these two writers to explain the experience. HOW TO RESPOND: Identify one other person that is saying something similar to what you are saying and connect and expand on their thought. Alternatively, if you disagree with someone, identify where you see your ideas about the texts as different.
16 Comments
Alexis Medeiros
6/10/2021 01:03:26 pm
Chapter 2 The Literary Experience: I want to say that I largely agree with this statement, “The teacher’s task is to foster fruitful interactions-- or, more precisely, transactions-- between individual readers and individual literary texts” (Rosenblatt 26). I feel as though the best teachers and the teachers who fostered a desire for me to teach were the teachers that implicated these fruitful interactions. If teachers aren’t allowing a student to build connections between themselves and the text then what is the point of reading. The student will never remember the text unless there was a lasting impact made with the text and themselves. When teachers take a purely practical approach to literature it leads to distortion and confusion. Oftentimes we try to make the text say things that it doesn't, which completely misses the mark because we need to allow the text to speak for itself. We learn from literature and should allow literature to teach us in its most natural form. Personally, this statement captures the purpose of this writing and this current class as a whole, “He must understand the personalities who are to experience this literature” (Rosenblatt 50). Teachers must foster a relationship with their students because if they know their students personally then they will be able to prepare students for the reactions that they may have because of the literature . If teachers don’t know their students how can they choose accurate literature that best suits the needs of their students in order to foster fruitful interactions between the students themselves and the literary texts. I feel as though Mike Rose’s words and Penny Kittle’s words are echoing back after reading this text. Teachers need to foster re;ationships with their students so they will be able to better understand and appreciate the literary texts that they are reading.
Reply
Sarah Egan
6/10/2021 01:07:23 pm
Rosenblatt summarizes how it is important for teachers to recognize that their students need to develop observations for themselves when it comes to reading different works. Teachers should be guiding their students instead of providing them with the experience that they had when reading a text. Literature is diverse which allows for individual experiences to be shaped. An experience should not be forced onto reader because it could be turned into an academic experience instead of an enjoyable one.
Reply
Elizabeth Cheesman
6/10/2021 02:07:50 pm
You are right, literacy should be an experience and journey, not a forced moment. Finding meaning can be difficult for students and therefore, it is an effective practice for teachers to provide guidance. It is also important to define what it means to be a facilitator, though. As teachers, we do not want to leave students hanging, prompting frustration but we also do not want to do all the work for them. Some important questions: Will students truly learn if the entire class does an activity together with no independent work? Or is it better to have a balance?
Reply
Alexis Medeiros
6/10/2021 04:18:13 pm
This response and analysis of the two text is great! Teacher’s need to realize that their students need to make their own observations. Often times as teachers we get lost in our own opinions and ideas and often times we forget that our students are people and not just students. They are indeed students but young people who are going to go on and be the next generation. We need them to formula their own opinions because if they are constantly living by someone else’s world views whether it is a teacher, parent or even friend they will never create their own self identity. School is the perfect place to grow and start pieces together the person you are with the person you want to be! You’re definitely spot on with the tender buttons connections! Often times we are scared to try new things but we need to step out of our comfort zone and try new things in order to develop into our own person!
Reply
Elizabeth Cheesman
6/10/2021 01:10:47 pm
There are connections made between the brain (intellectual), body (physical) and mind (emotions) or Rosenblatt’s “elements.” Teachers underestimate these connections. It is crucial for them to recognize what happens in a student’s body and mind to then help them use the “equipment” or the intellectual, emotional and experiential needs to be successful. Rosenblatt argues that reading should not be seen as an interaction with a page but as a “constructive” and “selective” process through a critical lens, for example. The teachers’ role is to encourage “transactions” between the reader and texts. Smith agrees with Rosenblatt, as he argues that texts are static, but thinking and responding to reading and writing should not be. Fluent reading involves “making sense of print” or expectations of what may happen in a story. The conventions of reading and writing are determined by the lessons that teachers are trying to accomplish. Rosenblatt says this is a “give and take” when students find meaning and interact with the text in front of them. Both authors complement each other because their arguments encourage readers to evaluate the “why” and see if the connections between texts are being made. If literacy is just about the text, and there is no active interaction with students, this may limit student’s ability to effectively grow as a reader and writer in the long run. Gertrude Stein's Tender Buttons is a great example of this. Rosenblatt and Smith would say Stein’s piece is incredibly difficult for readers to make connections to the elements or the brain, body and mind. It was difficult to find the “why” or purpose of the piece due to the unusual words and language that confused the mind and brain. Stein’s piece also caused fear and tension in readers from lack of “transactions” between the reader and texts.
Reply
Gabriel El Khoury
6/10/2021 01:22:16 pm
Wholly agree with how you imagine Rosenblatt and Smith would react to our in-class reading of Gertrude Stein's Tender Buttons, Elizabeth. Not only is is a highly complex work of writing, but, like you said, it elicits "fear and tension in readers" because it to defies the expectations we as readers have whenever we approach a text: we want to comprehend, to extract meaning, and to leave a work of writing having connected emotionally. Stein's Tender Buttons rejects the transactional relationship between the reader and the words outright. It could be argued that our in-class discussion of this highly disorienting text in some way relieved the "fear and tension" we may have experienced had we read it alone, without the input of others. Regardless, it was a worthwhile experience, and we all managed to extract meaning, meaning derived from our respective standpoints in life.
Reply
Lauren Wrigley
6/10/2021 06:39:26 pm
I like the point you make about the lack of transactions between the reader and the text. When considering our experience with Tender Buttons, I definitely thought about this concept, lacking the "equipment" to work with this text, considering many of us weren't familiar with Stein or her poetry. I also like that you acknowledge the "fear and tension" that difficult texts elicit in readers; This makes me think about the idea of the 'affective filter', where students shut down and further struggle to understand meaning.
Reply
Gabriel El Khoury
6/10/2021 01:13:40 pm
In both Louise Rosenblatt’s Literature as Exploration and Frank Smith’s Understanding Reading, close attention is paid towards the experience of reading, the experience internally and, specifically in Roseblatt’s case, the experience on an individual level. Reading is after all a highly individualistic enterprise, and Rosenblatt keenly expresses this very sentiment at the beginning of a chapter entitled “The Literary Experience”: “There is no such thing as a generic reader” (24). Not unlike Rosenblatt’s interpretation of reading as being a uniquely individualistic, subjective experience, Smith’s Understanding Reading, concentrating heavily on the metaphysics of reading, forwards a not too dissimilar set of assertions. Much of the scholarly literature describing the complexities of the reading experience Smith finds terribly insufficient, fundamentally lacking in what he rightly sees as being “the richness that is reading” (169). In fact, Smith goes as far to say that “no one activity” (169), that “no description” (169) could ever sufficiently capture the fullness of joy that is to be found in the reading experience, that various terms and textbook jargon serve only as criminal reductions of a process as mystifying as it is marvelous. By attempting to over-intellectualize a process as personal and pleasurable as reading, much of what makes reading a profoundly human experience is consequently buried beneath cold, detached scholarship.
Reply
Aliyah Pires
6/10/2021 01:38:23 pm
I agree completely with what you say about the reactions Rosenblatt and Smith would have about the reading of Tender Buttons. The text allows for so many different interpretations rather than students being given one purpose or reason why the text was written. Comprehension of a text is not always one straight forward answer and I feel like you discussed that well through the readings of both these authors.
Reply
David Golden
6/10/2021 02:49:49 pm
I agree with you Gabriel that Rosenblatt and Smith would find that Stein's Tender Buttons is a matter of comprehension. Every reader is going to find their own meaning in a text. Tender Buttons was written for that purpose. If a teacher tried to force their perspective on their students the piece would be meaningless. I think you are spot on with the individual. It is our own experiences that allow us to look at literature with a different set of eyes. If all teachers mandated a certain perspective then literature would be a lot less interesting.
Reply
Aliyah Pires
6/10/2021 01:34:47 pm
In Rosenblatt's reading he discusses how it is important to allow students to make connections from themselves to the text. They need to build observations and ideas for themselves rather than having the teacher conduct the observations for them. Teachers need to understand that students have different connections based on their life experiences and it is helpful to remember text in this way. Students cannot remember as deeply what a text is saying is the teacher is restating an experience for them. Reading provokes so many different ideas based on the students' thoughts which is important for educators to remember. For me I know I remember a readings aspect more when I can find a connection to it from my own experiences.
Reply
Sarah Egan
6/10/2021 02:25:32 pm
Aliyah, I also discussed how Tender Buttons was a great example of what Rosenblatt and Smith talked about in their works. They wanted us to realize that the interpretation of a reading is left up to the individual reading it, and not the writer or the person teaching it. Literature promotes curiosity and Tender Button demonstrates that. Your statement "For me I know I remember a readings aspect more when I can find a connection to it from my own experiences" is a very relatable one. I find myself remembering texts better that I explored myself.
Reply
David Golden
6/10/2021 02:44:43 pm
In Smith's article it discusses how teachers should have students come to their own conclusions when reading a piece of literature. He talks about the definition of reading and how teachers often try to define literature for their students. That is not the case because literature is subjective, you are meant to grasp your own meaning and that is Frank Smith's point. Students should interpret the meaning of the text at their own pace so they can fully grasp their own understanding of it. If they are able to accomplish that then they are more likely to be more involved in future readings.
Reply
Emma Healy
6/10/2021 06:48:51 pm
David, I agree that Rosenblatt and Smith would enjoy the challenges we faced reading Tender Buttons. It proved that everyone in the class approached it completely differently, which is exactly what the two suggest. There isn't one right way to read or define reading, as it is up to the reader to interpret for themselves. When reading Tender Buttons, we were all trying to determine the meaning while looking at the print, but we struggled. This proves how even experienced readers face difficulties reading, aligning with Smith's argument. Like you stated, perspective and past experiences have a lot to do with how we approach reading.
Reply
Lauren Wrigley
6/10/2021 06:28:01 pm
Both Louise Rosenblatt and Frank Smith would argue that reading is an experience in which an interaction occurs between the reader and the text. The latter theorist focused on the idea of predictions and intentions that played a role in the relationship between the author of the text, providing the intentions, and the reader that predicts these expectations. From a psycholinguist perspective, Smith focuses on how readers comprehend what they’ve read, by interacting with the text and their past experiences with reading to formulate focal and global predictions. Therefore, due to the uniqueness of humans and their individual histories, these predictions, and even the comprehension of the text, have no limit, as they are unique to the person doing the reading. Rosenblatt compliments Smith’s theory in her pedagogical belief that the interpretation of literature can’t be limited and is developed based on the reader’s past experiences. Just as past experiences guide the expectations readers have for the text, the ability to make these predictions functions on the need to encounter these experiences with literature. She also believes that these experiences have to be developed on their own; Essentially, the teacher must facilitate the interaction between and the text to influence a meaning-making process rather than deposit the information into the student’s mind and leave them ignorant of the experience.
Reply
Emma Healy
6/10/2021 06:40:20 pm
Louise Rosenblatt views reading as a skill that requires intellectual, physical, and emotional capabilities. Reading isn’t just pronouncing words but finding meaning in them. To discover meaning, students must draw on their past experiences. The reader approaches a text with a particular purpose in mind while looking at the signs on the pages. There needs to be a clear distinction between the text and literary work as well. The text is the, “sequence of printed or voiced signs” while the literary text is the meaning behind it. The teacher’s role in this is to help communicate the relationship between the reader and the literary text at hand. Reading is an emotional outlet that gives readers out of body experiences that wouldn’t necessarily happen in real life, an escape really. We want to gain knowledge but also seek ourselves out (identification) and sympathize with characters in texts. In classrooms today, there is a gap what the student may think about a certain text and what the teacher thinks the student should get out of the text. Because of this notion, students are often afraid to voice their beliefs in a classroom. Teachers need to encourage students to approach literature personally without the fear of failing. Students should feel secure in a classroom, in themselves, and in their teacher.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Torda's
We will use this space for both asynchronous and synchronous classes. Archives
June 2021
Categories |