"The connection paradigm...values the negotiation of contexts, the ability to 'write with fragments' ([Johnson-Eilola in "Negative Spaces: From Production to Connection in Composition"] 24). In this approach, writers focus on reorganizing and rerepresenting existing (and equally intertextualized) texts--their own included--in ways that are meaningful to specific audiences" (Selber 135).
Reading the entire first portion of "Rhetorical Literacy" in Multiliteracies for a Digital Age made me shout in agreement, "YES! YES! YES!" Okay, well I didn't do any of it out loud, but the inside of my head was going crazy in excitement agreeing with what Selber had to say. Being not only an English teacher but also a special education teacher, I am HUGE on connection to texts. Honestly, I feel without connection the student will fail. Maybe not necessarily receive a failing grade, but the students will fail in taking away something essential from the class. Also, I believe that if we, as teachers, don't give multiple opportunities for allowing students to connect to the text, we have failed in our role as an educator.
If there is no connection, my question is: what becomes the point of teaching the topic? The connection paradigm allows the teacher and the students to reflect on why this is essential both now and in the future. So, let's go out there and teach students to connect to the text by reorganizing and rerepresenting existing text, along with adding original input. This will give students a motive for actually having to learn the material and work with the text.
I'm glad you're finding resonance with things that interest you, Leandra. Yonker and Rice go even further than Selber's work on connection when they address networks in the readings we'll take up in a couple of weeks.
ReplyDelete