Am I a control freak?

Ah - so you fell for my hook. I'll answer that title question later...

First, let's discuss Lauer and Asher. I'm sure many of us have taken a career interest inventory to determine strengths and weaknesses and possible career paths. If we haven't done it, we know someone who did. I'm wondering if that kind of inventory is based on some sort of prediction study. Sometimes those inventories are remarkably accurate. I know that some are hokey, but there are some well-developed models. After reading that chapter I briefly tried to locate some of the better career inventories I knew about to see if I could find a "research base" for their development, but I didn't find anything like that. I'll admit that my search was a cursory one at best.

The message that I got from the Problems with interpretation section was not to theorize, not to leap to conclusions, and not to read into the results. These studies are simple predictors - not full-blown theories. But, I'll bet that theories are developed often because it would be very tempting to equate the strongest predictor to be the one that would lead to the greatest success. But the very last line of the Summary is one that I find very intriguing-"In fact, these principles are so well established in prediction research methods that they call into question the ethics and legality of placing or classifying students or predicting their success in composition classes in any other way." I wonder if that would hold true for any class or just for composition.

On the topic of Brodkey, I concur with many of the other bloggers. The first couple of pages were unnecessarily dense. I guess it's catty to wonder whether she normally speaks this way or if this is her way of trying to impress others. Meow.

Emily's blog brought a perspective that I never even considered. Her comments did make me wonder whether Brodkey was a little too subjective. In the Don and Dora example, Brodkey suggests that Don is nonplussed when he replies to Dora after learning that her good friend's husband was killed. I'm not sure that his response shows him to be as stiff as that. I'm wondering if maybe Don didn't know how to console her. Maybe Don just isn't as emotionally available as he should be - not just for Dora but for anyone. How does Brodkey conclude that he is "nonplussed" through that comment? He could just suck at showing sympathy. I think she might be jumping to a conclusion when she states that "Don's response is characteristic of the kind of discursive uneasiness that arises whenever one of the students interrupts the educational practice that deems such working-class concerns as neighborhood violence irrelevant." That seems like a leap to me. I don't know that he deemed the violence as irrelevant at all!

I did ponder Brodkey's point about teachers transforming comments that students make into topics as a way to control what does and does not count as knowledge. My students write in journals just about every day. I try to always find something to comment about. I don't really think about it in terms of controlling what is knowledge. I do it to try to connect with them and to provide feedback or food for thought. But now I'm questioning if I do that. If I do, it's not an intentional way to control anything. It's meant to stimulate students to think about something they may not have considered. I also give them journal prompts and blog prompts. It is somewhat controlling - I'd rather refer to it as "directed" because I do want them to focus on specific strategies I'm working with them on. But, in fairness to me, I always have a prompt that says, "Write your own prompt." Does that mean I'm off the (control) hook? Sometimes I think I'm a control freak. This article just fueled that fire.