home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!PRISM.GATECH.EDU!SM51
- Message-ID: <199209111817.AA15680@prism.gatech.edu>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
- Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:17:36 -0500
- Sender: "Megabyte University (Computers & Writing)" <MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET>
- From: sm51@PRISM.GATECH.EDU
- Subject: Battle of Slatingrad
- Lines: 24
-
- I greatly respect my colleagues who do pedagogical research and don't do
- literary theory. I endorse the idea that these people ought to have their
- own tenure lines and equal institutional standing if that is what they
- want.
-
- But there's also a danger in such separations. You've all no doubt heard
- the bad rep deconstruction has gotten. It's a nihilist practice, people
- say, morally corrupt because it denies the possibility of truth. Okay
- maybe that's so, if you take deconstruction to extremes.
-
- But I want to warn of a corresponding danger in this practical,
- functionalist defense of pedagogy that a lot of folks are expounding. The
- danger is in overlooking the way that skills, performance, and standards
- emerge from social context. As thinking people, we need to subject that
- context to inquiry and criticism. Sure it's important to study the
- practice of teaching; and in autonomous programs if necessary. But just as
- deconstruction can lead to a nihilism that ruins the sacred truths, a
- narrow focus on practice may engender a complacency that ultimately serves
- those who would stifle critique.
-
- Practice keeps theory honest by reminding it of social reality. Believe it
- or not, theory can sometimes do the same for practice. If we let it.
-
- Stuart Moulthrop
-