“It is very upsetting to think that the Hawaiians must be unsure of their national identity” (w26s1, Comment 2).
“I never knew the history of the United State’s occupation of Hawaii and now that I do, I am somewhat bothered” (keithjagger, Comment 11).
Checkbox (quoted in the title, Comment 9) concisely summarizes an historical dynamic. Pedagogically, I am trying to operate on several levels, simultaneously modeling practical writing skills, laying groundwork for (a chance of) spontaneous dialogue, and enacting both a lived/living (organic) relationship among students and teacher (who is also a learner), and between the university setting’s “container” and the public sphere (i.e., the rest of the real world).
Aisforastronaut describes the learning activity:
“We are all researching to fight for something,” is an interesting and powerful post if you know the context. We learned about Hawaiian Independence in class through a film, and the freshman writing students had to post comments about it. Our job (the juniors) is to figure out what else Steph’s post might mean. There is a lot that can be taken out of this. Right now, Steph’s two writing classes are working on research papers. Through this post Steph showed how to take other people’s words and using them to develop an argument and present information by using citations (by crediting them). Steph just took words and ideas (research) from students’ comments to make a meaningful post that ties many possibilities together (Comment 5).”
Relevance of Good Research
At the practical level, balderdash found it “interesting how the post created a conversation with student blog posts instead of factual documents upon which usual arguments are based” (Comment 27). Students noticed specific skills and conditions necessary for writing a good research paper:
“To write a good research paper we also need a lot of resources,“ says pylee (Comment 31), a sentiment echoed in the vernacular by treschouette as the “need to do ‘hella’ research” (Comment 21). This means “you need to know the facts!” (anon136, Comment 1), “[recap] everyone’s opinions” (ajch, Comment 26), and be selective by “pick[ing]the best line” (unknown29, Comment 19). E388 summarizes: “With every argument, there are different sides, and with that comes the different reasonings why we each favor one side over the other” (Comment 22). “In this type of a situation, an informative argument,” explains mjollnir89, “…conciseness and accuracy are the most important aspects. The arguing party is in charge of garnering massive amounts of information and sifting through it to obtain the useful facts and combining them into a logical train of thought” (Comment 29). The most pithy argument of the need for good research came from confusioniseasy:
“You need to understand information on all levels and sides,
so if something is thrown at you, you are
not squashed like a bug and look like a fool”
(Comment 15).
Adding to a Conversation
With respect to laying a foundation for further dialogue, students’ respond by summarizing and reflecting on the specific example of the Hawaiian Kingdom’s case to the World Court, displaying different points-of-view, as well as critique the case (debating the merits of the Hawaiian nationals’ argument) and the activity (its effectiveness as a teaching tool). Beginning with the critique of the pedagogical method:
“[The DVD] was hard for us to watch…because it was assumed that we had more information than we did” (redsoxfan218, Comment 23). Keithjagger presented a different side: “the DVD on Hawaii was good in the fact that it showed us there is something to be learned from the manner in which the Hawaiians argued their case” (Comment 11). From the dvd to the blog was another layer that evoked comment: yepp0628 admitted that the transition “slightly overwhelmed me. I had to read the blog two times to fully comprehend and see the connection in the arguments” (Comment 30), while redbeardthewriter expressed a starker reaction: “I don’t really understand if Steph is looking for something in particular or looking for me to dredge up another idea on the matter” (Comment 17).
It remains to be seen whether an actual dialogue about Hawaii’s status will develop from students’ responses, but the range of perspectives necessary to provoke new thinking is present. w26s1 describes the situation as a “catastrophe” (Comment 2) – from the context I do not know if w26s1 refers to the Hawaiian nationals’ successful case in The Hague or the US takeover of Hawai’i. ““50 states, after all,” says rocketsredflair, “is an even number that has fit nicely on the US flag” (Comment 4). Carmella confessed to a state of “turmoil as to the relevance to Hawaiian independence” (Comment 8).
Oddity33 observes: “its amazing how many people can have such different opinions and ideas of one text” (Comment 7).
“The fact that more than a hundred years have gone by and Hawai’i has not given up their kingdom (well not entirely) and that they have recieved international recognition as a Kingdom and not a state of the U.S. is incredible” (hippo86, Comment 13).
“[T]he Larsen’s team comes up, the people in the team try to fight back the United States. They become the first one to speak for Hawaii kingdom and people” (winglsammi, Comment 28).
Iplayball muses, “i am still unclear as to the exact stages of “occupation” that the us is in hawaii. The question that comes to mind is “did the u.s somehow take control of hawaii without permission? and if so isnt it ironic that america fights other countries for doing this exact thing?”” (Comment 20). Adc92388 echoes iplayball’s concern: “The whole ordeal makes us as students consider the role of the government in our daily lives, and how we want to be treated as citizens” (Comment 16). Providing a contrary view, checkbox argues, “The fact that the US was repeatedly invited to participate in these proceedings and chose not to do so is not a confession of guilt but an announcement of indifference” (Comment 9). RandomActofKindness went further, “I’d rather go fishing” (Comment 18).
Metalcircus expresses doubt, if not disbelief, asking, “Is there really any chance….[the U.S. will concede Hawaiian sovereignty]?” (Comment 12) Pragmatically, kmb04 outlines a common dilemma: “even with a deep research your argument can still fail. Sometimes it is not what is being said but who is saying it…. This does not mean that those with no power should just give up, what they say still sticks out in some people’s minds and even if they can’t change the actions of an entire country, they can change the actions on a person to person basis” (Comment 6).
Beyond the University: From Academia to the Real World
“I want to believe that for lasting change to occur, intelligent thoughtful action must be taken.” Likeboldcolors continues, “But it’s so slow. It can be really frustrating to wait and have the patience to stick with the processes necessary” (Comment 14). Like research, actually talking through the differences and making compromises in order to shift out of conflict is painstaking work. I had asked if it is possible for people/s in conflict to “argue peaceably.” Oddity22 suggests such an idea is “an oxymoron. I always believed that a disagreement was one thing and an argument was a completely different thing, an argument was a disagreement gone crazy. Peaceably arguing? i dont know” (Comment 7). Aligirl22 defines a critical factor:
“…both parties have to want to argue in a peaceful manner.
Its much easier to fight with force and anger and hatred…” (Comment 3).
Ciaobella adds a layer of interpretation, speculating as to why and how the activity is useful to me (as teacher/learner):
“Steph uses quotes from blogs that her students have posted in regards to the U.S and Hawaii. She uses these quotes possibly to advance her own knowledge of the current situation and asks us, being her students, to post our opinion creating new thoughts and ideas” (Comment 10).
Yes, my own knowledge is advanced on two levels: in terms of content (the struggle Hawaiian nationals face in gaining US recognition of their claim), and at the contextual (abstract) level of distinguishing discourse (habitual, patterned ways of speaking certain set knowledges) from dialogue – Ciaobella’s generation of “new thoughts and ideas.” Of course, these are some of the ultimate goals of quality research: not only summarizing the perspectives on a particular issue (topic) but also actually adding an observation or recommendation or angle that allows new or different understandings to develop. The process of assigning students from different classes to read each other’s work does seem to inspire a high(er?) quality of interaction: “I can totally see my fellow classmates minds at work. One believes this conflict [between Hawaiian nationals and the U.S. Government] to be peaceful, while another believes that there is no chance for the problem to be solved” (pinkpanther89, Comment 25).
Two updates: The University of Hawai’i campus at Kapiolani will offer “Introduction to the Hawaiian Kingdom,” a 200-level course in Hawaiian Studies, this spring. David Keanu – who presented the slide show in The Hague during the Proceedings of the International Tribunal – has just had an article accepted to be published in the Journal of Law and Social Challenges (San Francisco School of Law), vol. 10, Fall ‘08. The article, “A SLIPPERY PATH TOWARDS HAWAIIAN INDIGENEITY: An Analysis and comparison between Hawaiian State Sovereignty and Hawaiian Indigeneity and its use and practice in Hawai`i today,” (available for download as a pdf) distinguishes between the tribal sovereignty granted by the US government to (some) Native American tribes and the independent sovereignty recognized by Great Britain and France (1842) and the U.S. (1849) and reaffirmed by the 1999 international arbitration proceedings at The Hague of the Larsen Case.
A question lingers:
Now what? Does the conversation end with the articulation of varying points-of-view, different capacities for hope, and limits to imagination? Or do we find a way to carry on talking a new kind of talk based on learning the diversity of opinion and complexity of obstacles? Shall we go through the motions, saying all the things that have already been said over-and-over again, or shall we find ways to say things that have not yet been uttered – and keep saying them until they lead to change?
. . . and keep saying them
keep saying them until
saying them until they
saying until they lead
until they lead to
they lead to change
lead to change
to change
change
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:14 pm
I think that the meaning of this reading is to illustrate and to help us understand how what we learn in this class will ultimately help us in the real world. It shows how important good research is because it is the foundation for everything else we do in this class and how important research is in everyday life. The things we learn about research and presentation from the Adding to Conversation can help us in real life in getting a job or ther things. So, I think this reading shows us how we can apply research to our real life.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:17 pm
I think this blog is another one about research and how it is important and can have a major impact on certain issues. Steph summarized what most of us said in response to watching the video about the Hawaiians. She is giving us tips on how to do research and is emphasizing what is important when doing research such as finding opposing sides and being able to address it.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:19 pm
This last part of the blog emphasizes the importance of the rhetorical situation. It shows how important it is and how using it right (like the Hawaiians) can lead to significant change. It also tells us how important it is to add to a conversation and expand not only the audience’s view but also ours. The first part emphasizes the importance of good research. I think what Steph is trying to do is show us that using these three techniques will be important in writing a paper not only for class but for a real life situation too.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:19 pm
Steph had us read this because it shows how research can not only be helpful in papers like the one we just finished but also in everyday situations. Everything you know comes from some form of research whether it be from listening to others and learning from them or going out on your own and looking something up.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:20 pm
I personally don’t know how to reply to this blog. I still don’t fully understand the conflict between the Hawaiian Nationals and the United States. Because of this I am unable to comment on the issue. I did notice, however, that this post is once again connecting my freshman writing class with Steph’s junior communications class because there is quotations from students from both classes intersperced throughout this post.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:20 pm
I believe the meaning within Steph’s post is that good research can help you in real life situations. Research is what can make or break a paper…without sufficient evidence, you have no backbone to support an argument. Steph is enforcing the importance of research in our current assignment and possible future assignments.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Steph’s recent post highlights the students from junior writings’ remarks about how “we are all researching to fight for something.” She cites AisforAstronaut’s blog and how it summarized our progress in class. The activities at hand consist of each class commenting on the quotes and remarks of the other (junior writing) class, thus creating a dialogue between classes using technology. The compilations of each class’s comments give a concise overview of the perspectives in both classes. The posts are also helpful because they provide an example as to how much research and citations are needed to construct a strongly supported idea or argument. The next step could possibly be bringing up opinions on more politicized issues, to really get the pot stirring. The would generate a ridiculous amount of conversation.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:23 pm
I’m wearing a scarf…it’s really warm and comfortable. It’s one of those wintery things that I wear many times to protect my precious voice from the harsh elements of the cold New England weather.
That should not be the case for change. My wearing a scarf is not changing anything—it is preventing discomfort and hopefully keeping me from doing damage to my voice through exposure to the elements. It’s soothing purpose is just that: static. My scarf does not do anything else—it’s red and grey rugby striped and made of wool every day…and it does the same job every day.
Essentially, to get change we need to find ways to bring new ideas to the forefront. To make people understand where we come from we must relate to their ideas and explain our own in terms that they are comfortable with.
If people only say the same things over and over to the same audience, it becomes commonplace, annoying, and eventually angering to hear. It’s like being nagged by a parent: you keep hearing them and you know you’ll do as they wish but you just can’t right away because you have a paper to write for your English class. And eventually you hear “Did you take the recycling out” for the sixth time in approximately four hours and you just snap—not necessarily leading to change, but likely leading to an arguement at some level or another.
Dialouge is necessary for peaceful discussion and for positive action. Therefore, there needs to be some compromise or change in wording in order to make solutions more palatable to all parties involved.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:24 pm
The historical of Hawaiian, its a really good example for student to write a good research paper. Steph tried to analyze the main points of which way we can do the research paper in a better way. I pretty agreed with her of “adding to a Conversation”. its a good way that we can more strongly support the research paper, we are not only just find the truth, but we also can make a clear conversation in the research paper.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:24 pm
First off, conversations end. Rhetoric and discourse regarding ideas and thoughts do not. What is being described here (at least in my eyes) is not a conversation. Whatever, it’s all semantics. I like to think that academic “conversations” never end because there is always a new side to the thought-stream.
But, here’s the thing and it’s got a wicked catch-22 type deal to it:
New ideas are great and they are really critical to keeping a conversation going. But if everyone has different new ideas and no one agrees, then nothing ever gets done. Additionally, if a new idea is not revolutionary enough in the face of many old ideas that agree with each other, then that new idea is quashed.
Conversely, old ideas will foster change, but only if all those thinking about these old ideas are in agreement. The thing about old ideas is that they are old for a reason; they have withstood the test of time. As a result, most old ideas and the people who subscribe to them are extremely attached to one another. So if everyone has an old idea that is completely different from everyone else’s, then nothing ever is agreed upon and a conversation reaches a standstill. However, old ideas can foster change much easier than new ones when all the old ideas agree. Again, this is because they are old for a reason and have withstood time itself so in that sense, they must be at least a tiny bit logically sound and mentally appealing.
Old ideas are really great for hammering in points. If a new idea sparks enough change, then it can become an old idea and thus affect change. New ideas and old ideas are not mutually exclusive and much like growing old from childhood, old ideas once came from new and exciting ideas.
A good conversation has new ideas and old ideas working together. Hopefully, the people and entities that preserve and promote these old and new ideas are open-minded enough to accept change and difference. This fosters an even greater understanding among involved parties and it is this sort of discourse that is best.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:27 pm
I think the main point of this article is to show how important research is when conducting an arguement. There are many ways to retrieve information for what ever the issue may be. I also believe that this article makes a statement to us that we need to use our research wisely and use it to look at the issue in different perspectives.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:32 pm
In this blog, Steph is using the words of other students to create a single arguement. In perspective, this is very similar to how a research(Larson)case is produced. First, text is procured from sources that pertain to the subject. The text is then analyzed and the prime pieces are taken and melded together to form the argument. In a sense, Steph might be indicating that even our words can be used as a source, are important enough to use, valuable enough to form an argument around. An argument that can produce change or provoke thoughts and debate. Or she could just be summarizing our mad raving about a distant issue that has no real impact on our lives.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:36 pm
In the documantry movie about Hawaii and our research paper, we learned how to focus in the social problems. The movie lets us to see things that the United States tries to cover. The United States tries to hide up the negative history, in order to let the United States citizens be proud of their coutries, be patriot. In our research paper, we need to focus on the social issues, and how do we want to change them. During these assignments, I feel that we stand on the other point of view to see the world. In college, we are learning how to use our small power to change the big world. Everyone of us has power to change the world, how to make it better.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 5:52 pm
To me,United States is a freedom place, however, when you come up with a serious issue, they may think that they deserve to get Hawaii.The history between the Hawaii and America, was a mysterious to us since we do not know which side is right and which side is wrong.However, through the reference and the historical effects, we can see that how it works, how the system works and how the people feel in the issue.We have to add things into our conversation, especially the main points, by learning the way that Steph did, I’m pretty sure how to analysis the resources that we are having.
Tuesday November 13, 2007 at 7:50 pm
I think th econversation doesn’t end. It can end because you chose for it to but there is always an option or way to keep it going. Either you will conversate until it leads to change, or you conversate and nothing comes of it but getting your opinion out there, which is a win win situation.
Wednesday November 14, 2007 at 9:42 pm
I believe that our examination of this subject goes far beyond just talking about the issue of the Hawaiians identities and the United States, but how the rhetorical situation and research helps us to understand multiple points of view. It is very important that us as students become more involved in multiple persepctives of an issue as we try to learn more about how to write research papers, and pick apart topics where controversy may be present as a driving force in opposing research areas. This dialogue between opposing sides of a conversation is important in learning how to be better students in discerning between good and bad parts of an issue.
Saturday November 17, 2007 at 7:03 pm
for context, this is our assignment from Steph: Contribute your own map of the conversation, select a theme of significance to you, and add something relevant and thoughtful.
This conversation reiterates the importance of the relationship between research and interaction. The film and Hawaiian nation conversation brings up an important comparison. One of the criticisms of the film is that it is hard to watch because it assumes we have more information than we do. Another compliment of the film was that it is relevant because of its good research, which is presented with conciseness and accuracy. I think this is an inherent problem with conveying complex and controversial information. It can sometimes be difficult to absorb all the density of information presented for an argument in one sitting, but the argument can also be undermined if there is not solid enough evidence to support it.
The research presented in the film seems to have had a penetrating affect on our classes. Steph chose to highlight this quote – Iplayball muses, ““i am still unclear as to the exact stages of “occupation” that the us is in hawaii. The question that comes to mind is “did the u.s somehow take control of hawaii without permission? and if so isnt it ironic that america fights other countries for doing this exact thing?””. “There are a range of perspectives elicited from this conversation. Dialogue is necessary for peaceful discussion and for positive action…Therefore, there needs to be some compromise or change in wording in order to make solutions more palatable to all parties involved,” says treschouette. I like redbeard’s train of thought – a good conversation has new ideas and old ideas working together. This seems to be the approach that the filmmakers took, combining old ideas (i.e. international laws and US supposed adherence to them) and new ideas, that maybe it is possible to challenge US occupation. I guess, like most things, this conversation comes back to context and perspective. For some people the idea of Hawaii being an independent or sovereign nation is new. Others are very aware of the idea of occupation. I guess by getting the opinion of an international court, adds a new fact or ruling to the situation, but that new idea didn’t appear from thin air. It is comprised of past, present, and future, and consists of varying perspectives and potentialities. Old ideas and new ideas working together, research and interaction give substance to these ideas.
Sunday November 18, 2007 at 11:41 pm
redsoxfan218 states, “I think that the meaning of this reading is to illustrate and to help us understand how what we learn in this class will ultimately help us in the real world.” I have to agree. I think that by reading this post we can realize if we haven’t already that everything we do in school can be applied to a certain situation or experience in life. This might be of a surprise to some people, yet it is common for others. It also says something about the power of information and the power of information leading to change. I had never learned about the ordeal in Hawaii. I was totally unaware until I watched the film in class. What if I had felt so strongly about something I had not known before and wanted to do something about it? That right there, sparks and fuels a fire of change, and that is something very powerful and can be applied throughout your whole life.
Monday November 19, 2007 at 2:11 pm
I feel that that this post is trying to bring everything together. Steph mentions how we she is trying to start a dialogue and how people are doing research and learning. I nthis post she shows the conversation between her two classes on the same topic. She brings together teo groups of people who have never met and show how people have learned from each other.
Something new and important is added when Steph adds a real world view to the picture. Before, our comments were more about a specific article. However , with Hawaii, it can have a big effect on the country in the future and it has really become important for us to see and understand this. In this context it is especially nice to be able to have a chat with others, even those with different opnions, without having a long term effect. Its a learning processes that will eventually prepare us for the real world. And Steph even adds a figure of the real world into her post. Eventually, we will have to move the conversation to an even more public domain. I agree with redbeard the writer “First off, conversations end. Rhetoric and discourse regarding ideas and thoughts do not.” Even though conversations end, I believe that new conversations will rise based on the old ones and the rhetoric and discourse will become very important.
Monday November 19, 2007 at 8:37 pm
This post is one in its own. Props to Steph for incorporating a vast amount of quotes stated by both her freshmen and junior classes. The contents of the post flows nicely, creating an intertwined conversation of opinions between classes. I am happy to hear that the University of Hawaii, the Kapiolani campus, will be offering a class regarding the Hawaiian Kingdom. The class being taught in person can help educate those who are unaware of this issue, or to help get students more involved. Balderdash1 says, “The next step could possibly be bringing up opinions on more politicized issues, to really get the pot stirring. The would generate a ridiculous amount of conversation.” I believe this class will only progress conversation and involvement!
For some reason, this post along with shininginthewind’s resonse of, “…she [Steph] shows the conversation between her two classes on the same topic. She brings together two groups of people who have never met and show how people have learned from each other,” remind me of Babel. We (the juniors) have blogged about this movie countless times, so it is hard to not relate anything to it. Like I said, we will never escape Babel!!
Monday November 19, 2007 at 10:14 pm
I think The purpose of this reading, the putting together of many comments, is learning. By having access to your classmates ideas enables students to perceive different sides. Two students could watch the same documenatry on the Hawaian National Trials, and have two very different responses. I love that I can read a blog and learn something new or see another side to an arguemnnt that I didn’t pick up on my own, it allows, and helps me to learn. The blogs are research for learning information. If twenty people in the class write a blog and each have something different to say, a vast amount of information is created. This information is available to students, similar to a research topic.
Monday November 19, 2007 at 11:30 pm
I think it’s pretty cool to see how all these different thoughts (quotes) have been woven into this piece by Steph. I took this post as an illustration of how students can learn from eachother. When students are promopted to respond to a question or thought, they must think. They must then go and post this to the world to read on the internet. For the most part we, the students in Step’s classes, are the only ones who read these posts, but they still spark thought. We are able to see what other people’s opinions are on the same issues. There have been numerous times when I have read the responses of other students and noticed different interpretations of the same material. People who have no physical contact with eachother can become involved in discourse that leads to progress and or learning.
Tuesday November 20, 2007 at 1:34 am
All hail Steph for here divine quote incorporation! But seriously, I found the intertwining of all these quotes comforting to see. As volatile as Hawaiin Occupation/independence be, the topic can without a doubt lead to some hot discussion as well as debate. Who really occupied who? Who’s at fault? Who the hell cares? It was very intriguing to see how all these opinions/statements can blend into one conversation and make it out alive. It’s a shame so many politcal debates about US occupation don’t end up the same way. People can get rightoues (spelling?), others can get offended, and it is with that reason I choose not to take sides, at least at this point. Though I must say I agree with Ciaobelllla on her belief that it is a good thing for Hawaiins to take a class about their history at a University. With knowledge comes power, but then again, ignorance does equal bliss. Blah.
Tuesday November 20, 2007 at 2:07 am
After re-reading this post, I found the last part of the post the most intriguing to me. “Does the conversation end with the articulation of varying points-of-view, different capacities for hope, and limits to imagination?” So many times do I hear conversations, some political, which fail to aknowledge more than one side of a topic. Why not? Perhaps out of fear that the “other side” might be right? In my opinion, it is aknowledgement of all sides of an issue that truly gives a person credentials when presenting an arguement. It is only with this aknowledgement that a person can truly see the other side and make a valid opinion on something since they have something to base it on. That is why I appreciate the discourse taking place in this post. All the posts don’t reflect one viewpoint and they give a reader a well-rounded view of the topic at hand.
Tuesday November 20, 2007 at 1:18 pm
To say or to do? I think that’s the question at hand. Do you continue to argue peacefully or do you take action. It could be argued that arguing in itself is taking action, but is it enough?
Taking a look into our own history, we are quite aware that peacefully arguing did not lead to our “independence”. War replaced the argument. Many conversations referring to the current situation for Hawai’i reveal strong discouragement that anything grand will occur. Sure, they may receive recognition, hell, Hawai’i can be known as a kingdom across the world in all seven continents, but will that conversation alone grant them their independence from the United States?
In recent news, a woman in Africa was fed up with having conversations relating to racism so she chose to set her self on fire. This woman was engulfed in flames and has a family that needs her. One can only assume that her conversations led to her madness because nothing was being done; to her, there was no action being taken against racism. Now, as far as how that has affected the world, I have not ‘done my research’, but I can say that it HAS caught my attention.
I do not underestimate the power of peacefully arguing, but in most cases its progress is slow. Women, minorities, gays and lesbians (just to name a few in the U.S.) have been advocating and demanding for equality and fair treatment for decades. Although there has been progress, the essence of equality does not exist. And in many instances, progress has occurred as a result of nationwide protests or murders (action). In my opinion, you need to say AND do to see any drastic change take place, especially during your lifetime ; p
Tuesday November 20, 2007 at 1:36 pm
@redbeardthewriter:
I like how you have distilled conversations, rhetoric, and ideas. I think you’re right on the money when it comes to “ideas [...] do not [end]“. I also appreciate the distinction between old ideas and new ideas. My own thoughts on this subject have turned toward a more fluid process of idea generation and evolution. It’s not always about new ideas overcoming old ideas in revolution. Sometimes (if not always), progressive ideas are just products of old ideas. I suppose we agree that it is the conflict between ideas that allows for a “new idea” to be created. Cause and effect is very relevant here. We would never get anything done if we all agreed. But we really don’t need to worry about that ever happening, eh?
Tuesday November 20, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Everything we learn is for a reason. No matter how unrelated to the class the information may be. For example when we were watching the video on the Hawaii I was search for any clue as to why Steph was showing us all of this. But it doesn’t matter. Everything we learn in this class is for a reason even if I didn’t get anything out of that video for my writing I am at least informed about the difficulties that Hawaii is under. It is the same for the wiki. Why are we using this website? How is it helping my writing? To be honest I don’t know why but it is ok because I am still learning. Maybe not about hoe to write but I am learning how to utilize the internet to communicate more clearly with others. Everything we do in this class I can take with me not just next semester or for the rest of my time here in UMASS, but I can take it with me for the rest of my life.
Tuesday November 20, 2007 at 5:17 pm
I liked how Steph took bits and pieces of everybody’s post and mixed them together in the conversation of this post. It showed how different people’s opinions and ideas can be and it shows new ideas and points of views that you may have not thought about before reading this.
Tuesday November 27, 2007 at 11:03 am
I would just like to say that I think that this text is a wonderful and intricate web of our students ideas and comments not just from one group but from both. It is almost an omage to steph, and piece of artwork with bits a pieces from her students woven into the text like yarn in a sweater. This text provides many things, first the specific area of response, Hawaiian independence, and the comments students had when reflecting on the video and the conversation of understanding between them, then the juniors comments about these posts. The second part has to do with research, if you were to ask 100 people to define good research, they would supply you with 100 different answers, and in essence, this is what we have here. How is research important? How do we know when our research is done? is the purpose of research to be able to use it in everyday life? These are the sorts of questions entering my mind while reading this text.
Personally, I believe the key is to keep the conversation going. no one has to be right or wrong, only different. Difference is the way we learn about things, throwing ideas around with opposite minds is the way we learn how to take a step back and look at something from a different angle. This is how we should be learning everyday.
Thursday November 29, 2007 at 4:10 am
There’s a lot to be said about everything these days. Hippo86 was right on when tying in other issues with the issue of Hawaiian sovereignty. So many people, and groups of people, are fighting for so many righteous causes around the world. This Hawaiian sovereignty issue was brand new to me before watching the DVD and I’m sure there are plenty more DVDs I haven’t seen, more books I haven’t read, and more people I haven’t met that are fighting for things just as relevant in today’s world.
Now, the tying in of research. Obviously, we are doing a research paper and have been given a lot to think about over the past couple of weeks. These issues we’re researching in our papers are meant to educate ourselves more on the our subject and these blog posts and keeping the conversation going are meant to help us educate other people on the subjects we’re researching. Having such a topic as Hawaiian sovereignty gives us some idea of what research these people had to do and how they are educating others around the world.
Nothing ever really completely clicks until I’m writing about it in this blog. It all just finally hits me and makes sense. Writing AS Communication. It works.