Wednesday, September 12, 2012

While thinking about Wood, Bruner and Ross’s study reading I was struck by the assumption that it (and our beloved Rhetoric directors) make and whether or not this assumption is productive; namely the designation “expert” that we as newly minted T.A.’s are accorded. According to the aforementioned trio of psychiatrists a successful tutorial process is one in which an “adult or ‘expert’ helps somebody who is less adult or less expert” to achieve a goal. I could say with near certainty that we all are certainly more adult than our students but the question of “expert” is what gives me pause since the structure of this course is relatively new to all of us. Although the week long training course we all had prior to taking ownership of our respective Rhetoric sections was informative by no means did it leave me feeling like I was an expert who could even begin to really implement scaffolding techniques. It is for this reason that I have largely stuck to the common syllabus (in which I recognize the scaffolding technique. To bring it back to the article, I agree that for a student to succeed in their work that “comprehension of the solution must precede production” but in a sense I feel like I’m still going through the comprehension part myself. Unfortunately my course load does not exactly leave me with huge amounts of free time in which I could come to grips with the overall structure of the course, not to mention the assignments that are scaffolded (not a word, don’t use it) in. My methodology to the course thus far has been to focus on the current unit, wrapping my head around it and hoping that during the short period between rough draft and revisions that I can transition myself into and through the next unit. In this sense perhaps I am more “expert” than my students but employing scaffolding techniques correctly (like simplifying the task to avoid unwanted alternative methods or helping them maintain direction, not to mention how to control their frustration), but only slightly. The Rhetoric database has been very useful in that they have made available the work of previous students so that modeling a solution for the students is possible as well as giving us (the T.A.’s) the opportunity to see a completed work in the hopes that we will recognize the parts that make up the whole. All of that being said, I still wish I had more time to sit with the course materials after our training instead of being fed to the freshman with nothing but a common syllabus to cling to. But I know that my facial stubble, corduroys and cardigans scream “EXPERT” to the students, so I could just rely on the illusion.

(I had to post a completely unnecessary photo of my cats since I don't know how to insert other cool stuff. Sorry)

1 comment:

  1. Perhaps I'll let my 5 o'clock shadow go...or just tape cat hair to my face. That'll say "EXPERT." Although I will say that I appreciate the fact that the word "expert" comes from _expiriri_, which means to have tested, tried, or experienced. Mastery isn't really part of the etymological definition, so it needn't be part of ours!

    ReplyDelete