Again, I enjoyed the opportunity to approach Nancy's presentation ideas in a way that both emphasized her point of collaboration and got us, the audience, involved. This idea of collaboration that Lunsford favored was an interesting one. I found myself wondering about teaching students collaboration and contestation. As far as the "real world," those ideas are very sound, and often necessary in order to get things done. There are few offices in the business world where collaboration is not mandatory (rather than just encouraged), and many situations in life where contesting the status quo is desirable.
Where these ideas do not seem like they would be widely embraced is in the academic world. According to Nancy, both she and Lunsford have witnessed places in academia where students (and Lunsford herself) were punished for collaborating, and nothing (I have experienced myself) will lower your grade faster than arguing with a professor about the way that things are done in the classroom, or defying a professor's faulty logic. This particular difference between the academic and non-academic settings reiterate arguments that indicate a student's impediment when transferring from the university to employment.
I did enjoy the idea of memory, especially as it is used as a collaborative tool. It is almost like we are collaborating with a self from a previous time, which is an awesome concept.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Emily,
ReplyDeleteIt’s true that the academic world seems to frown horribly on collaboration (I’ve experienced it myself in a few of my undergraduate classes). In fact, while doing research for my own presentation, I found that there is quite a lot of scholarly backlash against a concept that many fields in the “real world” see as not only commonplace, but essential to an institution’s functioning. However, in doing my research, I have also seen an equal amount of viable urgings for its recognition. Indeed, as you stated, this vehement argument amongst scholars about whether or not collaboration should or shouldn’t be accepted in the academic realm, which is attempting to prepare us for future careers, reiterates how a student can be hampered when transferring from the university to employment.
Thomas
I agree that collaboration and dissent are needed, but for different reasons entirely. First, let's examine the university's role in promoting the cult of the individual:
ReplyDeleteWe are born alone. We die alone. We stand before God in judgment alone. Certainly, then, we must defend a dissertation alone!
So much of Academia is still mired in medieval thinking, betraying its institutional nature. And like all institutions, Academia is monolithically conservative. An enormous slime-dripping monster with one tentacle in Industry, another tentacle in the Military, another tentacle in the Church, and yet another tentacle in Government, Academia simultaneously crushes and exalts the individual because it is an institution with institutional interests. It's the same situation in the corporation/army/church/senate: teamwork is encouraged, but individuals get promoted. The more ruthless, ass-kissing, and backstabbing you can be, the better. Genuine compassion and sharing do not get rewarded, even though such virtues are touted by masters and slaves alike. In this regard, college is ideal preparation for a lifetime of servitude.
I agree with Herbert Marcuse: "Under the conditions of a rising standard of living, non-conformity with the system itself appears to be socially useless, and the more so when it entails tangible economic and political disadvantages and threatens the smooth operation of the whole."
Yes, I agree with Marcuse, but I can't abide.... Contesting the status quo is desirable if you're a sado-masochist or a total moron. I'm either one or the other. Probably both. As for Lunsford? The jury's still out.
Over the past 40 years the university found that it could safely assimilate new identities into its ranks: women, blacks, gays, etc. "Wow. They're rational human beings just like us!" chimed all the bald white heads. I doubt those same bald white heads who still run the show will be so accepting of multi-author dissertations. The notion of such collaboration strikes at the very heart of the institution.