My point was that autoethnography discusses this and the messiness of feminist praxis. There are places where these discussions have and are currently happening. Why reinvent the wheel?
But my main point was not about a pedagogy of vulnerability. My point was to discuss what Lucy said on the roundtable that suggested that you have to teach your most vulnerable students to comply w/ the system. Not the the students must learn the system to resist it.
-
-
No, that's absolutely not what I am saying. I'm saying it's good to show students they can be incomplete/ imperfect. That can feel quite personal - but we academics are like this too. It's ok, for eg, to be upset in response to texts - it can even be incorporated into your work.
-
I spent ages trying to be what I thought a 'good' student/academic was - impersonal. Now I try to teach that it's ok to bring your personal responses in - but I also show students they can do that in a sophisticated, history-of-emotions way, and it can enrich your work *and* you.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
To be fair, I'm pretty sure I'm the one that 1st raised notion of being transparent with students about the system, eg marking rubrics etc. My point, which I don't think I got across well, is NOT compliance - it's honesty about the rigged game, & support to subvert it
-
You did raise it, and I understood you to be saying what you say here.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.