Reflecting on Blogging

Dear Students,

During this semester of English 1010, I have asked you to blog because I speculated that it would have pedagogical benefit, which means that I thought certain course goals could be achieved or augmented by your participation in an online public forum in which ideas are discussed by the wider community. Some of you have embraced this opportunity and have written thoughtful and thought-provoking entries which have helped your readers to better understand your positions on certain issues; in these cases, your writing has often been inspired and inspiring, causing me to see a side of an issue I had not considered before. On the other hand, some of you have simply created the entries because they were required, and your writing for the blog displays no special insight and conveys your ideas in a rather lackluster tone, giving your reader(s) little to contemplate. Given this diversity of responses to the blog, I would like for you to reflect on your participation in the blog.

In order to consider your participation, I would like you to answer all of the following questions in a paragraph or two. Here's the list of questions:

1. Do you think the blog has had an effect on your writing for English 1010 or any other class? If so, how has it? If not, why do you think it hasn't had a positive or negative impact on your writing?

2. Before you answered the blog each time, did you read my entry carefully? Did you read others' entries to see if your opinion had been expressed already? Did this reading have any effect on how you chose to answer the blog? If you did not read others' writing, why didn't you?

3. Did you learn anything from the blog that you did not know already?

4. Do you think blogging is a good activity for English 1010 students to be required to do? If so, why? If not, why not?

5. How would you change the blog to make it a better and more useful experience for English 1010 students?

6. Finally, if you were going to tell one of my future English 1010 students what to expect from doing the blog, what would you say?

I appreciate your participation in this experiment with the blog and encourage further commentary from you if you are so inclined.

Happy Holidays!
Ms. O

Responding to Genocide

Dear Bloggers,

Instead of blogging about intelligent design this week, I would like to take this opportunity to ask you to think about something more pressing in humanitarian terms, the current genocide in Darfur, Sudan, a country in central east Africa. In the past 2½ years, the Sudanese have suffered the slaughter of over 300,000 people and the displacement of over 2 million from their homes. Additionally, the Amnesty International website reports that “systematic human rights abuses have occurred by all parties involved in the conflict, but primarily by the Sudanese government and government-backed Janjawid militia” (www.amnestyusa.org). These human rights abuses include organized ethnic-cleansing, murder, rape, torture, and enslavement of Sudanese men, women, and children. This systematic effort amounts to genocide.

The term genocide was coined in the 20th century to refer to the mass killing of an entire people; it is derived from the words geno (Greek for race or people) and cide (Latin for killing). In the 20th century, we witnessed several events which can be labeled genocides, and we are currently witnessing the genocide in Africa. These include, amongst others, the Holocaust perpetrated by the Nazis in the 1930s, the Rwandan massacre of the 1990s, and the current crisis in Darfur.

Like any human phenomenon, genocides follow a pattern; although there are distinct differences between them, certain characteristics seem to pervade all of them. For instance, it is characteristic of genocides that citizens are killed en masse by their own governments, which means that the entity that is supposed to protect the people turns on them, claiming that its own people are a threat to the state. During genocides, vast numbers of women are systematically raped by soldiers and militia members, and children are often conscripted into the army or are killed. Genocides seem to occur when one group of people in a society labels another group as “other” because of racial, ethnic, religious, linguistic, political, or regional differences; for instance, the German Nazis targeted the Jews, who looked different (according to Hitler) and whose religious practices and beliefs differed from what was considered to be the norm.

One of the most troubling patterns we see as genocides develop is that the rest of the world knows about them long before it acts to stop them. In the 1930s, the United States knew about the Nazi extermination of Jews and other people long before we joined the war to stop the slaughter. In 1994, the world watched while between 250,000 and 500,000 Rwandan women were being systematically raped and up to a million Rwandans were being killed by the interahamwe militia and the Rwandan Patriotic Army. Today, we are aware of the genocide in the Sudan, but the international response has been tepid and slow at best. In most cases, the world’s reaction to the atrocities committed during genocides is sluggish and insufficient, considering the enormous scope of the human rights abuses and mass killings. Shouldn’t we be outraged enough about these events to act?

Now that you have some background on genocide in general and the crisis in Darfur in particular, I want to ask you to think about why various nations and the United Nations do not respond more quickly (or at all) to genocide. Why do genocides happen, and why do we allow them to happen? Given the horrific and unjust nature of this ongoing, wide-scale slaughter and abuse of human beings in Darfur, Sudan, what should the United States do to respond? What is our responsibility to these suffering people who live across the globe from us?

--Ms. O

Belated Blog Links

Since I can't figure out how to set up links to others' blogs in the sidebar just yet, let me offer you these two blogs as additional sites of interest.

First, English 1010 student Alex Boles is hosting a blog at www.a-boles.blogspot.com. His current discussion is about conformity, and there are comments from other 1010 students which attempt to answer some of the questions Alex poses in his initial blog entry. Please throw in your two-cents' worth to help Alex get his blog up and running!

Second, check out the DurnMoose Lodge at www.dmj-lodge.blogspot.com. This one is a weekly roundtable discussion of particular newsworthy events. Hosted by The Moose, the blog includes several writers, of which yours truly is one. Join us this week for a discussion of the Pledge of Allegiance and our national anthem, amongst other items. Your comments are welcome!

Cheers!
Ms. O

Diving Beneath the Surface of Belief

In the commentary on my first blog regarding the teaching of intelligent design in school, a wide range of opinions has been expressed. Some bloggers argue that science classes should include both evolution and ID because "all sides of the issue" should be taught; others say that ID should not be taught at all because it is not science. Still, other bloggers have cautioned us about teachers teaching what they believe rather than pure content, and at least one person has questioned whether there is time in the curriculum to teach anything besides what's on the standardized tests at the end of the road. We have a number of people who believe in creationism/ID but don't think it should be taught in schools because it is religion and should be left to churches to teach. A few people argue that ID should be taught instead of evolution because they believe ID is true and evolution is not true. Others think it would be fine to teach ID in required religion classes which cover a wide range of creation stories from various religious traditions. A couple of people mentioned the debate in the scientific community over the specific workings of evolution, noting that even hard-core scientists disagree about how evolution works. In essence, the rich array of opinions expressed by Nota Bene bloggers mirrors those expressed in our national discourse. These are exactly the lines of argument that you will find in the New York Times editorial pages, in televised roundtable discussions, and in some news reports about efforts by ID-supporters to move ID into public school curricula. You will even find many of these arguments parodied by Jon Stewart in The Daily Show's series "Evolution/Schmevolution"!

As we continue this discussion about religion and science in our national public life, I am wondering where we get our ideas about what is true and what is untrue about the origins of humanity. If you believe in ID and creationism, who told you that creationism was true, and why do you believe in what that person/those people say? If you agree with evolutionary theory, where does this belief come from? Are the people who taught evolution to you trustworthy? Regardless of whether you consider yourself to be a religious person dedicated to biblical understandings of our origins or a scientifically-minded person with the scientific method behind you (or some combination of the two), please consider the sources of your beliefs. Where does the authority come from to support your ideas? Who taught these ideas to you, and what evidence do you have to support your continued belief in a particular notion of origins?

As you answer these questions, first define what it is you believe as clearly as you can and then explain how you came to this belief.

Breaking Urban Poverty after the Flood

In class lately, we've been discussing the Hurricane Katrina disaster along the Gulf Coast, and, to encourage us to think beyond the immediate relief situation, I handed out "Katrina's Silver Lining," an article by New York Times Op-Ed columnist David Brooks (Sept. 8, 2005, edition). In his article, Brooks argues that, after the horror of the hurricane, we now have an opportunity to address significant social and economic disparities that we were all too willing to ignore before the disaster. Specifically, Brooks wants us to remediate the cycles of urban poverty in our nation by working to rebuild neighborhoods that are socio-economically mixed. What this means for New Orleans and other towns and cities along the coast is that housing patterns will change, commercial zoning will have to change, school districts will have to be re-established along different lines. The amount of work it will take to make these changes possible is staggering, but the potential to re-envision what America could be is incredible and should give us hope.

If you are interested in this issue, write a response to Brooks' proposal. Do you think his ideas will work as we rebuild in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama? If so, why do you think they will succeed and how long will it take to make the changes necessary? If you don't agree with Brooks (or believe he's wrong-headed in his specific plan), explain why he's wrong and offer your own solution to the problems that have been revealed in the wake of the flood. Regardless of your opinion about Brooks' ideas, I want you to ponder what your role will be in addressing the racial, economic, and social injustices we have been discussing in class.

Monday 6 to 9 Class--Blog # 1

Dear Monday Evening 1010 Students,

In our first class, we got off to a very energetic and positive start in our conversation about the film Inherit the Wind. Several of you spoke vehemently about the relationship between religion and science as it plays out in the public sphere. Some of you seem passionate about what is taught (or not taught) in schools, particularly in relation to the question of evolution versus creationism/intelligent design. Others of you were quiet for various reasons, perhaps because you don’t like to talk in class or because you couldn’t get a word in edgewise or because you don’t really care one way or another about this issue.

Whether you have strong ideas about these matters or feel apathy about them, I am interested in your thoughts. Therefore, for this blogging exercise, please comment on whether or not you think creationism should be taught in primary and secondary schools’ science curricula. When you write, be sure to explain why you hold the opinion that you do, and, as you write, remember that people from outside of our class can read what you’ve posted to the blog.

Happy Blogging!
Ms. O