Blog Post #4--CCSS for speaking and listening at http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/ and NES text pages 130-135
Rhetoric is an interesting concept in general. It sort of strikes me as a process of presenting information in a certain way in order to receive a specific response. In other words, coaxing your audience to agree with you. I see this a lot in modern society, and I don't think it's inherently good or bad in nature. When it comes to public speaking I am personally quite gifted (when in a proper mood). However, I've heard somewhere that the typical human thinks at around 1400 words per minute, and speaks at around 400. Something in my brain prevents me from choosing the right wording, so I try to prepare my speech ahead of time to avoid this issue.
A degree of comfort is essential to the environment around the speaker and the listener. The reading focuses on the speaker and listener a lot, but I'm personally more concerned with the environment. I see the environment as a huge factor at play. I'm more inclined to listen to a speech in a classroom than on the sidewalk. I'm more inclined to speak in a classroom than on the bus. As a future teacher one of my goals is to make my classroom a comfortable environment which will allow shy students to be more at ease. I am a firm believer in the value of allowing the individual thought to shine through, and wish to encourage students to express their true selves. I believe it is always better to say what YOU want, as opposed to saying what THEY want to hear- as a general rule. This boils down to integrity.
As for the common core standards Washington State has subscribed to- I see immense value in having a common denominator for language standards. I'm learning in my linguistics class about the difference between descriptive and prescriptive language. The common core standards definitely have a focus on prescriptive language, and it's altogether necessary for such to exist in the academic world at large. I do not think this should overshadow descriptive language- or language used on a daily basis in a non-serious setting. In fact- I believe there's a great deal of comedy to be derived from clashing to two. In a story I'm currently writing I have one character who uses descriptive language almost entirely, and he interacts with some very serious people who use mainly prescriptive language. It's a hoot n' nanny. Darn tootin'. No flabbergastin' this hombre's already bamboozled philosophizin'. Ain't no way. I got it down to a science- but it's art. It's sarence. (science and art).
Rhetoric is an interesting concept in general. It sort of strikes me as a process of presenting information in a certain way in order to receive a specific response. In other words, coaxing your audience to agree with you. I see this a lot in modern society, and I don't think it's inherently good or bad in nature. When it comes to public speaking I am personally quite gifted (when in a proper mood). However, I've heard somewhere that the typical human thinks at around 1400 words per minute, and speaks at around 400. Something in my brain prevents me from choosing the right wording, so I try to prepare my speech ahead of time to avoid this issue.
A degree of comfort is essential to the environment around the speaker and the listener. The reading focuses on the speaker and listener a lot, but I'm personally more concerned with the environment. I see the environment as a huge factor at play. I'm more inclined to listen to a speech in a classroom than on the sidewalk. I'm more inclined to speak in a classroom than on the bus. As a future teacher one of my goals is to make my classroom a comfortable environment which will allow shy students to be more at ease. I am a firm believer in the value of allowing the individual thought to shine through, and wish to encourage students to express their true selves. I believe it is always better to say what YOU want, as opposed to saying what THEY want to hear- as a general rule. This boils down to integrity.
As for the common core standards Washington State has subscribed to- I see immense value in having a common denominator for language standards. I'm learning in my linguistics class about the difference between descriptive and prescriptive language. The common core standards definitely have a focus on prescriptive language, and it's altogether necessary for such to exist in the academic world at large. I do not think this should overshadow descriptive language- or language used on a daily basis in a non-serious setting. In fact- I believe there's a great deal of comedy to be derived from clashing to two. In a story I'm currently writing I have one character who uses descriptive language almost entirely, and he interacts with some very serious people who use mainly prescriptive language. It's a hoot n' nanny. Darn tootin'. No flabbergastin' this hombre's already bamboozled philosophizin'. Ain't no way. I got it down to a science- but it's art. It's sarence. (science and art).
Comments
Post a Comment