In beginning Composition classes we often ask our students to choose topics that are arguable. We routinely ask them to make arguments, to take sides on an issue. Often times students reply to this by expressing skepticism about argumentation. “Arguing is stupid,” they say.
I suspect this response stems from the meaning we place on the word argument. An argument for most of us is an unpleasant experience full of anger and yelling. Even in the public arena this definition has gained ground as 24-hour news networks fill their time with rosters of pundits yelling about the righteousness of their “side” and shouting down anyone who dares disagree.
But argument and debate are critical rhetorical tools and being able to argue or debate well is a valuable skill (or more accurately, a skill set). Crafting a good argument entails gathering a sufficient amount of information on the subject or issue. That information must be understood and, indeed, weighed to determine the relative value of the information. Furthermore, argument requires the writer or speaker to understand the counter-argument – the other side of the argument – in order to be able to find its strengths and weaknesses. Arguing, then, is a way of deriving truth from an issue. Moreover, it is a way of solving the problem presented by the issue.
Certainly, this is a simplified view of argumentation. Many arguments persist because there is no clear “truth” to be found; the evidence can rightly be interpreted in a variety of ways. It is also an oversimplification, and in fact a true error of thinking many of us make, to assume that there are only two sides to any issue or argument. Often, there are many sides of any issue.
Nevertheless, the value of argumentation as a skill set cannot be overstated. Despite the fact that is can often fail to yield the solution to an issue or problem, it often does yield a solution. The process, as we’ve said, is extremely valuable for understanding the nature of the issue or problem, and this process isn’t merely academic in nature.
Business is problem-solving. People work because there are problems to be solved. We need to get somewhere, but there is no clear path. Problem. So, we build a road. The road begins to slip into disrepair. Problem. We repair the road. We cannot get to our destination quickly enough. Problem. So we create fast means of transportation, like automobiles. Choose any product or service and you’ll find in it someone’s attempt to solve someone else’s (or their own) problem.
When your teachers are asking you to choose an arguable topic, they’re not out to frustrate you. They’re simply beginning the process of teaching you how to gather information, understand it, and propose solutions to problems. Every argumentative paper you write – arguably any paper you write – is an exercise in problem-solving. This is one of the most valuable skills you will acquire in school because no matter what career you choose to pursue, your ultimate job is going to be to solve problems.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Putting the 'W' in STEM
There has been a lot of excitement in the academic community about the new Dayton Regional STEM school set to launch in Fall of 2009. As you may know, STEM stands for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. It is in these critical areas that the school aims to prepare students for the new knowledge economy of the twenty-first century. Certainly an emphasis on these areas of learning is appropriate, but conspicuously missing from this formulation is the letter W – for Writing – which can serve as the root that allows the STEM school and its students to flower.
According to an article in the Dayton Business Journal, the “STEM school curriculum will feature typical classes like, history and language arts.” However, it is clear that writing currently takes a distant back seat in the school’s educational plans. If this oversight isn’t corrected, the school’s goal, as expressed by Gregory R. Bernhardt, dean of Wright State University’s College of Education and Human Services and chief facilitator for the STEM school, “to prepare students with the skills necessary to compete in our rapidly changing economy” will be seriously jeopardized.
The National Commission on Writing, a research and advocacy group formed by the College Board, has been working with educators, businesses, and government to understand the important role writing plays in the success of students and workers alike. In their seminal report, “The Neglected ‘R’: The Need for a Writing Revolution,” the commission discovered what composition teachers have long known: “If students are to make knowledge their own, they must struggle with the details, wrestle with the facts, and rework raw information and dimly understood concepts into language they can communicate to someone else. In short, if students are to learn, they must write” (9). They further concluded that “The reward of disciplined writing is the most valuable job attribute of all: a mind equipped to think. Writing today is not a frill for the few, but an essential skill for the many” (11). Clearly, then, writing is critical to success in both the classroom and the boardroom.
In one of several follow-up reports, “Writing and School Reform,” the commission further established the importance of writing as a core skill at the root of student learning:
Leading educators participating in commission-lead discussion forums developed a strong consensus that “the widespread use of writing across curriculum areas, including mathematics and science, holds the promise of improving students’ writing competence” and “deepening subject-matter knowledge” (25 emphasis mine).
In a recent edition of Dialogue, a Wright State newsletter for faculty and staff, Susan Bodary, executive director of EDvention, characterized the goal of the STEM school as one of “prepar[ing] students who solve problems, create, innovate and lead us toward the future.” Clearly, if the school is to achieve that goal, writing must be a central element of the school’s curriculum.
Without writing as a root of learning, the STEM is unlikely to draw enough nutrients from its educational soil to allow its students to blossom.
According to an article in the Dayton Business Journal, the “STEM school curriculum will feature typical classes like, history and language arts.” However, it is clear that writing currently takes a distant back seat in the school’s educational plans. If this oversight isn’t corrected, the school’s goal, as expressed by Gregory R. Bernhardt, dean of Wright State University’s College of Education and Human Services and chief facilitator for the STEM school, “to prepare students with the skills necessary to compete in our rapidly changing economy” will be seriously jeopardized.
The National Commission on Writing, a research and advocacy group formed by the College Board, has been working with educators, businesses, and government to understand the important role writing plays in the success of students and workers alike. In their seminal report, “The Neglected ‘R’: The Need for a Writing Revolution,” the commission discovered what composition teachers have long known: “If students are to make knowledge their own, they must struggle with the details, wrestle with the facts, and rework raw information and dimly understood concepts into language they can communicate to someone else. In short, if students are to learn, they must write” (9). They further concluded that “The reward of disciplined writing is the most valuable job attribute of all: a mind equipped to think. Writing today is not a frill for the few, but an essential skill for the many” (11). Clearly, then, writing is critical to success in both the classroom and the boardroom.
In one of several follow-up reports, “Writing and School Reform,” the commission further established the importance of writing as a core skill at the root of student learning:
In the past, the best schools placed great emphasis on writing. Grammar, rhetoric, and logic (saying things properly, saying them well, and saying them in a way that makes sense) were seen as cornerstones of powerful educational strategies. Exclusive private schools continue to rely on them. The valuable tool of writing must be put back in the hands of schoolteachers, not because writing is an optional talent that students might find useful at some point in their lives, but because writing (and the conceptual skills it reflects and develops) opens up new and powerful means of learning for all students (16).
Leading educators participating in commission-lead discussion forums developed a strong consensus that “the widespread use of writing across curriculum areas, including mathematics and science, holds the promise of improving students’ writing competence” and “deepening subject-matter knowledge” (25 emphasis mine).
In a recent edition of Dialogue, a Wright State newsletter for faculty and staff, Susan Bodary, executive director of EDvention, characterized the goal of the STEM school as one of “prepar[ing] students who solve problems, create, innovate and lead us toward the future.” Clearly, if the school is to achieve that goal, writing must be a central element of the school’s curriculum.
Without writing as a root of learning, the STEM is unlikely to draw enough nutrients from its educational soil to allow its students to blossom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)