Overall Class Reactions

I really didn't know what to expect when I began this course. I mean I had an idea from the course title that we would be discussing how to teach literature, but other than that I was clueless. As it turns out, this class introduced me to several new, worthwhile strategies that I will definitely take with me and implement in my own classroom.

First, the blogging assignments were worthwhile because they are an informal way to react to an event or text. They can easily be used in the literature classroom, and I truly think students will take pride in the fact that they have their own web site per se displaying their writing. Second, and probably the most beneficial for me, was the exposure to literary theories. As I mentioned before, if I would not have taken this class and began teaching literature in the secondary schools, I'm positive I would have stuck to a strict diet of New Critical theory, perhaps with some reader response. Again, this would have been due to the simple fact that this was only way I was taught literature, hunting for symbols and other literary elements while ignoring my own interpretations. The critical lenses which I have been introduced to provide me with a larger repertoire of instructional skills that will inevitably enrich my students' literary experiences. In essence, this was all I was searching for, and as far as I'm concerned the class was a success merely for this reason. Third, the reading we were assigned contained these theories and how to expand literary instruction. Fourth, the group teaches allowed us to 1) read three extra pieces of literature and 2) pull everything we have learned about teaching and English language arts instruction, in and out of this class, together to gauge how our own instruction might go; it was extremely a beneficial experience because we had to actually draft a unit and teach for an extended period of time.

The only thing I see that could use some revision is the discussion leader activities mainly because it is difficult to sit through three straight discussion leader activities with similar presentation styles. Other than that, I felt the rest of the work we completed was extremely relevant and wasn't too overwhelming whatsoever. Additionally, I enjoyed how our instructor, Todd, was very supportive and genuine in his guiding of the classroom. I use the term "guiding" because much of the time I felt as though he was just another student in the classroom. He really new how to generate discussion when conversation seemed to come to a halt. Also, he didn't look down upon us with an "I'm smarter and better than you all" attitude as so many professors do, and this really helped to create a comfortable atmosphere that fostered discussion. So to any of those English education students out there, you'll really enjoy this class and if you can take it with Todd!

Group Teach 3--The Giver

Personally, I thought the activities we had the class participate in were very interactive and thought provoking. There were some definite lulls in the conversation, but I feel as though this was due to that fact that a) it was our final class and b) it was the third consecutive class that we were exploring some specific text. Other than some of the perceived lack of enthusiasm, I thought the 3- hour block went rather well (I truly appreciate your thoughts and reactions Todd!). Some of the more thorough discussions were actually topics we didn't plan in addressing in depth, such as the potential cautions in the implementation of "Crossing the Line," the connections to Communism or religious aspects of Utopian novels. These were all wonderful topics, and they really had our group thinking about other points of entry for The Giver. Furthermore, we really wanted to concentrate on the idea of a Utopian community and its juxtaposition with our society; I feel our introductory activity helped the class to get into that mode of thought and the conversations that ensued frequently came back to this idea.

We wanted to stray away from some of the more complex literary theories with this book, especially because it is a young adult novel, and stick to some reader-response based activities in order to get the class engaged with the book. We originally planned to implement several literary theories into our instruction; however, feminism and Marxism appeared to be the only ones with significant theories. That being said, I wish we would have had more time to discuss feminist criticism, but that is something that we can save for our high schoolers. At first I thought this book should be kept in the middle school grade range where it is typically presented, but after considering critical lenses coupled with Todd's recommendations, I could see this being taught in high school. Additionally, some technology projects (i.e. digital storytelling) related to specific scenes or the ambiguous ending could be included. Ultimately, we wanted a balance between writing, speaking and hands-on activities, and I think we achieved that quite well.

Group Teach 2 / Violent Cases Reactions

This was my first real exposure to graphic novels, and I must admit I have never really done a lot of comic book reading in my lifetime (a few Spiderman reads I believe). I think the nature of the graphic novel is very compelling, especially when the illustrations are analyzed in conjunction with the words. These types of novels seem to be much more aesthetic, and having a class read one could be a nice change of pace from the typical novel.

I enjoyed reading the novel simply because I have never really read a graphic novel before. The illustrations were very intriguing, and I wish I could have spent more time making connections these and the print; however, I'm not sure I'm completely satisfied with its content. From the beginning I thought Violent Cases would be more about the narrator's abusive and unstable childhood. Since this was my expectation, reading through and learning that the novel focused on his fascination with gangsters, I was a little let down. This is not to say that this wasn't a brilliant idea, it's just not where I saw the novel going, so I feel this is why I was a little unsatisfied. Additionally, as Trevor alluded to in class, I don't know if I walked away from the novel with any real sense of how this character changed. The apparent static nature of the narrator left me personally with a feeling of emptiness because the novel details his specific fragmented memory, and it doesn't end with the narrator's current thoughts on the situation (although I realize this probably wasn't the goal of the novel itself).

After reading Violent Cases I was really interested to see what the group was going to do with this novel because I personally thought it would be difficult to teach for 2 1/2 hours. Well they proved me wrong! I really liked how we discussed the issue of memory and performed the activity to recall details of a well-known world event. It really engaged the classroom and made us begin to analyze the nuances of memory that are very complex. The comic activity was also very interesting, especially when the second sheet was passed out. Typically, the words do explain the pictures and there is a sequential pattern. The second sheet challenged that and made us begin to question the characteristics that are embodied by a comic. Finally, another moment that really stuck out for me, was when Cassie read that statistic of how many more words students are exposed to in comic books than typical novels. This was quite astounding and gave me enough reason to look into teaching these types of books in my classroom. The only thing I wish we could have discussed a little more was the illustrations themselves, but I know time was running short. Overall, I thought the group did a very good job in exploring Violent Cases and the graphic novel in general.

Group Teach 1 / Bell Jar Reactions

First of all, I want to mention that both the novel, The Bell Jar, and its author, Sylvia Plath, were excellent choices to have the rest of the class be exposed to. I felt as though the novel immediately showed signs of a great work. For example, when Plath describes Esther Greenwood's unusual thoughts concerning her experience in New York. She should be having the time of her life, but her cynical state of mind requires her to constantly question the status quo and society's expectations. I was hooked because I too have felt the same way Esther feels when in New York here at WMU. While my friends go out and have a good time I usually decide to stay in and study or get my homework done. I do so mainly because I don't have anything to fall back on financially; therefore, I have to succeed in college or I could very well be working at the local fast food joint. I always have thrived academically, and I feel this strong concentration has led me to miss out on several other hobbies or experiences typical adolescents are exposed to. This is exactly what began to fill Esther's, and quite possibly Plath's bell jar. The difference, however, is that these thoughts don't consume my entire thought process, and they don't lead to serious self-doubt or a depressive state, I just accept it and move forward. Not conforming to society's expectations can be a form of self-expression, and I believe it can be positive in many ways. But constantly seeking to resist it altogether can lead to serious pitfalls as in Esther's case.

Additionally, I admire Plath's eloquent use of language, and I find it amazing how she was able to give us a glimpse into Esther's journey into--and possibly out of--psychosis. As she describes her thoughts and suicidal actions in a calm tone, the experiences almost appear as if these thoughts are normal. Not to mention, having been introduced to the life of Sylvia Plath and the autobiographical nature of the book, it makes it that more interesting to read. I have really never read a novel like this one, and I would recommend it to just about anybody seeking a good read.

The group who presented The Bell Jar had some good activities, and some good discussion questions as well. But due to the topic in discussion, and the small number of students we had present, it may have sparked conversation a little more if they used a think-pair-share strategy. This way we could have had a little more time to grapple with the questions before attempting to respond. Other than that, I really liked the activities that dealt with the feminist and psychoanalytic theories. This book is perfect for both of those, and examining the particular scenes and relationships between men and women gave us something other than Ester's craziness to think about. The information on Plath's life was especially useful considering that the novel was semi-autobiographical. As I mentioned before, now knowing that Plath was really suicidal makes me want to reconsider which thoughts in The Bell Jar were her own and which were entirely Esther's. A lot of the ideas the group touched on could have been explored more thoroughly (in a 4-5 week long unit), especially the ideas of 1950s culture and suicide. Moreover, we were planning to use a "write the next chapter" activity for our book The Giver (due to its ambiguous ending; we didn't steal it I promise!), and I like it because it allows students to display some creativity without the fear of being "wrong." I also enjoyed the other reader response activities such as the newspaper article or guided imagery can really get those reluctant readers involved into the exploration of the novel.

Appleman Activity #16 Qs 3 and 4

3) Recently I saw an advertisement on television for Victoria's Secret in which there are several beautiful women strutting down what appears to be a runway. They are minimally dressed in lingerie to promote their newest line of bras and underwear. Additionally, they are wearing wings and their hair is blowing perfectly while people take photos and gaze in awe of the runway models.

4) This seems like an opportune time to apply the feminist lens to better understand this advertisement's implicit, maybe even unconscious motives. The women are dressed provocatively, all the while perpetuating that to be a woman is to be thin, "busty" and void from using her mind to capture the world's attention. Women viewing the ad could probably careless if these products were marketed in this way (simple pictures of their products would suffice), so it is obviously aimed at attracting men, or even homosexual women as well. This furthers the idea that women remain sex objects and that they are still trying to progress via their physical characteristics...

I would definitely like to use this activity in my secondary English language arts classroom for the simple fact that it enables students to see the practical use of literary theories in a real-world context outside the realm of texts. I am, however, weary that when students think of an artifact, event, ad, etc. it may be rather difficult for them to apply a lens; then again, asking them to have a literary theory in mind when explaining their event seems to defeat the purpose...So maybe it would depend on how they were able to make sense of the theories throughout the semester. I would probably use it toward the middle or end of the semester, after students have been working with critical theory for a substantial amount of time.

Reactions to Webb

I recommend that every Engl. 4800 student reads Webb's text at some point! Of each of the three texts that were assigned reading for English 4800 this semester, Webb's Literature and Lives was the most beneficial for me for several reasons. First, I'm really in favor of the Cultural-Studies approach he takes to teaching literature. Using societal conditions and realities such as homelessness, youth violence or prejudice to focus our teaching on are very important issues that are thematically unified by several texts as well as literary theories. Second, instead of introducing several literary theories silmultaneously as Appleman suggests, Webb does so by each theory's relation to a social justice issue. He doesn't necessarily suggest explictily teaching literary theory, but examining each text in relation to a social justice issue will nevertheless bring about relevant critical theories (but then again, multiple theories can be used on a single work, so I guess this is something I'm still unsure of...). Third, Webb integrates explanations of literary theories--as highlighted in gray boxes for easy identification--throughout his discussions of literary works to show connections between a text and a lens that would be useful to better understand that text. Finally, Webb provides backround information for most of the texts he references, so unlike Appleman, if I haven't read a text that is mentioned I am more able to see the connection between the text and a cultural issue or literary theory.

Reactions to Appleman

Appleman was definitely a step up from Wilhelm in terms of what it offered for teachers. Instead of just examining one critical theory in depth, Appleman examined explicitly teaching and implementing several literary theories to engage in accepting multiple perspectives when interpreting literature. I feel as though this was a very appropriate selection for English 4800 due to the text advocating for teachers to expand their theoretical perspectives. Any literature teacher can select a few texts, pass out worksheets, and have students fish for meaningless answers, but Appleman suggests doing so much more and expands on the scope of Wilhelm to provide teachers and students with a repertoire of interpretive mechanisms to make their own meaning. I enjoyed every chapter with the exception of deconstruction, which I would consider not having Engl. 4800 students read if they are to read Webb's chapter (a more clear, concise treatment of the critical theory). The nature of deconstruction seems--as students from Appleman put it--"very cynical," and not covering deconstruction would be a valid solution since several other theories can provide students with various ways to interpret texts.
Aside from deconstruction, I like how Appleman transitions into critical theory by using an activity that asks students to examine Mother Goose from the perspectives of various people. This is the essence of literary theory, and it is an effective building block to familiarize students with the nature of critical theory. Furthermore, I like how Appleman interweaves Martha's classroom and student responses to activites throughout the chapters to give the reader a sense of how these activities may unfold during implementation.

Overall Reactions About Wilhelm's Text

Before coming into English 4800, as I have mentioned before, I probably would have taught literature solely from a New Critical perspective because that is how I was taught to read literature. My has this class changed that. Instead of delving immediately into the various critical theories that I one day hope to employ, Wilhelm is a nice introduction into one of these theories known as Reader Response. It is a worthwhile text for any class that is aimed at the the teaching of literature, and I really think that reading this one first enabled me to be more receptive to the two texts that followed. Reader response seems like the most natural way to get reluctant readers "hooked" into reading literature by connecting their personal lives to the events and characters described in a text, so this was a good first read for me to get me thinking about alternatives to New Critical Theory. Activities referenced in Wilhelm that I would definitely implement throughout the course of a year include role-playing, dramatization, relating to characters by writing about a situation as if they were that character, guided imagery and filling in inter- and extra-textual gaps to name a few.
Although I feel the text was a very reader-friendly text, it seemed to become very repetitive during the last few chapters. Several of the sub-headings in the latter chapters were continually used, and I feel like the book could have been condensed. Not to say that there wasn't a lot of really good information contained within the text, rather it would have been simply enough to combine a few chapters.

Webb Chap. 7 (Poststructuralism)

'Within this approach, testimonial literature has value for my students far beyond the classroom. It provides a much-needed signal not to give up on themselves or on others. It inspires them to reach out and speak for themselves, to generalize from their own experience' (qtd. in Webb p. 139)

Although several works of fiction are obviously paramount to literature instruction, it is my belief that non-fiction works such as testimonials, autobiographies or even autoethnographies often can have more of an impact on students, considering the simple fact that they are first-hand accounts of entirely true events. I realize that fiction contains themes and characters who are indeed very real, but texts such as primary sources from the Holocaust or I, Rigoberta Menchu have defining characteristics that are very hard to ignore. Couple these works with guest speakers and you have literally brought the issue alive for students, and this is when I feel like the most substantial learning can take place. Students may not remember everything from the Diary of Anne Frank, but surely they will remember what the lady--who experienced the Holocaust first hand--had to say on her visit into the classroom. Moreover, having students seek out various subcultures within their community and then transcribing a autoethnography would be a wonderful activity, not only to have them interact with other cultures but to hear the stories of these often "marginalized" persons.
Moving forward, this chapter also got me thinking, especially since Webb mentions that the New Critics may not consider I, Rigoberta Menchu to be a "literary text," what exactly does constitute a literary text? I have been under the impression that literary texts are primarily works of fiction while non-literary are reserved to non-fictional, informational (academic), but I get the sense that a concrete definition may be hard to pin down. I have also heard that fiction with "irrational" story lines (i.e. some sci-fi) isn't literary either. A text should be considered literary if it can be used to explore the human experience, should it not? Any help here...?

Webb Chap. 4 (Youth Violence / Racism / Multicultural Studies)

Coming from a small town in northern Michigan--Gaylord to be specific--where often times the largest youth crime issue that appears on the local news or the "Police Blotter" section of the newspaper is retail fraud or M.I.P., it is easy for me to forget how many teens are actually involved in violence on a regular basis. Fortunately for me I wasn't personally subjected to much violence, but I definitely saw things via the media which let me know it was out there. I am reminded quickly, however, of the violence crisis right here in Kalamazoo when I recall a fellow peer in my pre-internship classes, who was doing her pre-internship at Loy Norrix, frequently spoke of the gang activity that was present there. She noted that students who were suspected to be in rival gangs, needed to be separated from contact in the classroom. Is this the correct way to handle a situation like this (I'm clueless here)?? I noticed that aside from the testimonial from Teysha (p. 68),Webb didn't mention much about violence that actually took place inside the schools. I guess this could fall more so under bullying, but it is a very intriguing condition nonetheless. I feel as though introducing a unit on teen violence by highlighting in-school violence can draw more students in, especially those students like me who were not subjected to violence on a regular basis. Then it may be easier for the class to transition into more severe issues such as gangs, weapons, or even homicide. Films that directly address this which could be used include Dangerous Minds or Lean on Me...


Youth violence and racism is definitely something that is worth closely examining, and I feel as though I'm obliged to read Native Son. On the other hand, each time I found myself saying Webb was neglecting some important fact, he immediately addressed my concerns. For example, in the beginning portion of the chapter he seemed to be focusing on inner-city violence and African Americans, which could possibly increase apparent "racial tension" among that obviously exists within our schools and the U.S., but surely enough he states "it is also important to recognize that violence is by no means confined to ghettos and that youth gangs are formed by all racial groups in many different parts of the country" (p. 62). These issues obviously hit home for students from all walks of life, and it is imperative that they are brought to the forefront of our literature teaching at some point during a given year. It seems that these issues of gangs, racism, youth violence, assault, etc. are all interrelated and could easily be examined for an entire year, if not longer. Furthermore, I agree that reader-response and multicultural studies are the best mediums for students to explore all of these issues, and can enable them to more easily put on the shoes of others in order to truly make sense of these social inequalities which inherently exist. These ideas seem to be the most powerful issues today's students can examine, in my opinion, and this chapter does a wonderful job at suggesting multiple points of entry (song lyrics, film, literature, etc.) to address them.

Appleman Chap. 8

"Pieces of literature may convey several different meanings. Most works do, but finding the meaning can be very difficult with nowhere to start. Critical lenses give this start" (p. 140).

"Literary theory functioned in my education as a prism, which I could turn to refract different spectral patterns of language use in a text, as one does daylight. Turn the prism this way, and one pattern emerges; turn it that way, and another pattern configures" (p. 141).

This final chapter basically speaks to one fundamental concept: Literary theories should enable students to understand different, multiple perspectives, not only in literary works but in their lives outside of the classroom as well. There isn't really much to discuss in this chapter, seeming how it affirms critical theory's rightful place in literature instruction, something I have consistently mentioned I am in full agreement with (perhaps with the exception of the theory beginning with the letter D!). Other than the final case Appleman makes for literary theory, she mentions two activities that I feel are really worth using in the classroom.

She begins the chapter by describing Martha's fifth-hour class in which the students are rotating about "literary stations." I like the selections of texts; however, if I were to implement this activity, I may put a single work in each of the stations to further reinforce the idea that a work can be subject to multiple interpretations. The learning stations not only get students moving about the room on a day when students are usually anxious anyway (have to love Fridays), but it is a sort of review of the theories they have been learning about throughout the year.

Speaking of review, the second activity mentioned (Activity 16 in the Appendix) asks students to recall what they have been learning about in a informal sort of way, considering it to be a group task. This was especially valuable because students can see how everyday artifacts can be subject to critical theories, extending the texts they have been reading. I am a firm believer that if students can see a direct link between the real-world context and what they are learning, it will be more meaningful and effective; this activity does this quite well. Additionally, the students' responses seem to all say the same, very important thing: Literary theory can be applied to any situation, not just the texts that we read. Finally, as the final student comment suggests, students probably have been using these theories (as perspectives) all along, but now they can lable them.

Appleman Chap. 7

The transformation of Martha as documented by Appleman in this chapter is quite astounding. When I firt read this discription, I immediately thought of my high school English teacher who is responsible for me wanting to become a teacher: "She taught literary terms, interpreted texts for symbol and themes, assigned study guides for novels, tested for vocabulary, and was especially adept at teacher her students to write academic papers...her approach was text centered" (p. 118). This New Critical approach to teaching literature was one I was very good at. I could pick apart texts for symbols and search for indirect characterizations for days, and in doing so I felt good about myself. After being in this class and being introduced to several critical theories, I realize the importance of putting on someone else's shoes to interpret a given situation. If I would have never taken this class or read these books, I may have attempted to teach literature strictly from the New Critical perspective because that is how I learned to interpret the canonical texts. Although I taught basic writing here at WMU last fall, employing a very student-centered model of instruction, I hadn't taught literature, and am I glad that I didn't! Luckily for me I am currently being educated with the latest educational theories. But being aware of Martha's changes, I realize that I may need to do the same ten years from now when today's theories are succeeded by more efficient ones.

There are a few major reasons why I am excited to integrate literary theory into my English language arts instruction. First, it allows students to become their own interpreters of the texts instead of relying on the teacher for a sole, correct interpretation; thus literary theory inherently seeks to "shift the balance of power" from teacher to student. Second, it enables students to connect with texts in ways that may be unattainable in the absencse of critical theory. Third, and probably most importanly, it enables students to consider multiple perspectives in regards to situations outside of the classroom, hence causing them to make better decisions, decisions they may not have otherwise made. In other words, multiple perspectives transcend the classroom, and any device that does so is worth using in the classroom.

I'm pleased to see that Appleman included an excerpt from Martha that describes how some students will naturally latch-on to particular literary theories, while some will totally resist many of them. It is my belief that no matter your content area, some students will be resistant toward learning certain concepts; literary theories are no different. Since I plan to teach math, maybe some kid will hit me with the phrase "when am I ever going to use derivatives in my lifetime?" Students' own personalities are constantly waging war with the material they learn, and this is completely normal. What I am getting at is that even though there may be some resistance toward certain theories or concepts, that should not deter us as teachers from implementing them. If we can somehow get the students to not totally give up on learning a difficult or abstract concept (the hardest part!) and shift these students' views, it can be a very powerful learning experience for those students.

Appleman, Chap. 6

First, let me apologize for the deconstructive treatment of "The Spur." Until Engl. 4800, I have never even heard of this literary theory, and like many of the students in this chapter, I can see how this lens is very difficult to peer through. With no assumed meaning, there seems to be a lack of a foundation for which things can progress. We as humans must find meaning in somethings, especially our language, to garner a sense of accomplishment. For these reasons, and considering how difficult it was for me to "deconstruct" this small poem (I realize that the size, or lack thereof, of the poem may have created some additional difficulties), I am not sure I would even go as far as mentioning this literary theory in my classroom. If it is confusing to me, won't it be even more confusing and demeaning to students?

Beyond a very loose, rough analysis of a poem, let me try and sort out what it is that I actually know about deconstruction. First, it seems very difficult to define. There are obviously many interpretations of what deconstruction looks like in regards to literary theory. As Barnet (1996) states, "deconstructionists 'interrogate a text and they reveal what the authors were unaware of or though they had kept safely out of sight'" (p. 101). Further, it seems that these binary oppositions come into play, no interpretation of a word or a phrase is safe, and contradictions in authors' words are regularly sought out. Other than this, I am clueless as to what deconstruction looks like...

Although presently I don't see any use for this theory, Appleman claims that "it teaches them to examine the very structure of the systems that oppress them..." (p. 106). This may be the only possible benefit I see. But if the goal of literary instruction is to examine a situation from another perspective, I feel like many other literary theories complete this task very well. Appleman also mentioned that the students gained a general sense of what deconstruction was, but that they hated it. Well, then, why teach something they hate? I don't understand why if the text should have no meaning, then why are we studying literature in the first place. Considering 1) that so many theorists are opposed to it and 2) so many students react negatively to it, it seems like the entire thing may hinder instruction. As one student put it, I too think this theory is quite cynical...

Deconstructing William Butler Yeats' "The Spur" (1938)

You think it horrible that lust and rage
Should dance attention upon my old age;
They were not such a plague when I was young;
What else have I to spur me into song?

First, it seems that "lust and rage" (l. 1) are very much components of Yeats' fascination with Ireland's pagan past. What else from this man's past requires him to have such strong feelings? He does not think it is necessarily a bad thing to be consumed with these desires at an "old age." Lust and rage are feelings usually associated with evil, so maybe they are the feelings of good natured people, implying that these feelings are good...He is also aware that these desires became more cumbersome as he aged, but how old is "old age?" "Old age" (l. 2) could quite possibly the same as "young" (l. 3), depending on one's perspective. So, maybe lust and rage were in fact very much a part of what he describes as his youth, implying that he was void of innocence; thus the pagan desires are manifesting themselves once again. When youth is age, Yeats may be contradicting himself since it is quite possible that lust and rage may surface at any time. Surely there are several other desires, both "good" and "bad" that may "spur" (l. 4) him to write poetry, and Yeats may not want to aknowledge this.

Webb Chap. 3

"'Today women can do anything they want,' Jennifer pointed out. 'If women want to go to college or become writers, there is nothing stopping them,' Nathan said" (p. 35). Believe it or not, but before I read this, I was thinking the same thing as these students. It may, in fact, be very difficult for students, both women and men, to connect to women's struggles for equal rights. These students are entirely correct; women today technically do have every opportunity that men are afforded, so issues such as women not being able to college may not seem as important to students. It is clear that the roles of women are perpetually changing. But as I continued to think about it, the real significance lay within the general perceptions of society about women when they are in these positions. Events such as the Miss America Pageant, to the feminist, perpetuate stereotypes that women are strictly concerned with fame or materialism. Similarly, the idea of a woman president has generally evoked negative thoughts that are very much connected to a perception of women (inferiority) that has deep historical roots.

All students should be examining this to understand that how women are perceived or how they "should" act, a.k.a. gender roles, are of real concern to them. That is why I am so impressed with Webb's instruction. He was able to make the seemingly irrelevant relevant by moving away from equal rights to gender roles with the feminist lens. This is not to say that students should not be examining woman's historical struggles for equal rights, but because students may think women are of equal status today, gender roles or norms will make feminist literary theory more applicable to the modern woman. Students are bombarded daily with messages about how they should act, and closely looking at these attempts will hopefully help students become more autonomous.

Additionally, when students examine other controversial issues like homosexuality using gay and lesbian studies, I feel like there will be some apprehensiveness amongst students. To combat this, I think it could be useful to explicitly ask students why they feel awkward discussing their sexuality. Moreover, I really like how Webb suggests scaffolding feminist literary theory with "queer theory" through the examination of identity and gender roles. By connecting gender roles to the identification of someones sexual preference, sexual orientation issues will not seem so taboo or isolated when spoke about in the classroom. I do not think, however, that there are a lot of texts you could use entirely with gay and lesbian studies other than texts primarily concerned with homosexuality. Otherwise it seems you would be fishing for connections to question characters' tendencies...

Appleman, Chap. 5

Overall, I thought the chapter provides some excellent activities to use in the classroom and with feminist literary theory. After discussing with students the nature of feminists and the dimensions of the literary theory (i.e. portrayal of female characters, influence of female writers, gender roles, etc.) an activity such as the one in the appendix would be very suitable. The activity asks students to examine common American objects, people, or events from both a traditional and feminist perspective. Something major that should be taken from this: how our society still remains a very much patriarchal society. As Bonnycastle (1996) states, feminist literary theory "...doesn't need to be revolutionary, but, like Marxism, it does aim at changing the world and the consciousness of people in the world" (p. 76). This consciousness can, however, be particularly difficult for male students to grasp, especially those who have a strong identification with masculinity. Examples of some of the heated debates that took place between male and female students in the classroom exemplifies the true struggle for power between men and women, and I'm not sure I'm completely comfortable with students attacking each other (p. 88). But then again, maybe this is necessary in order for the male students who are hesitant to look through this lens to truly acknowledge the woman and her importance to society...?

In addition to the works that are mentioned, I think, as always, that Alice Walker's The Color Purple can be a great text to apply feminist criticism. It of course pits the protagonist, Celie, in the midst of a loveless relationship with a cynical and degrading man, one that is forced upon her and views her as his property. Mr. ____'s initial behavior and attitude directly reflects the perceived "value" of A.A. women at the time time. This relationship could be the focus of the criticism, but there are some interesting points worth noting. Typical and non-typical gender roles are portrayed (i.e. the domesticated Harpo) and the dynamism of Mr.______ provides the story with some interesting motifs. Moreover, I like a book such as Beloved where a more matriarchal perspective is employed. This can get students to realize that there have been some very powerful women who continue to lay the foundation for the voices of future women.

Webb, Chap. 6

On one hand, I can see how African-American students, their parents and community members may object to Huckleberry Finn's portrayal of Huck's A.A. friend, Jim, and the use of degrading language. But on the other hand, why should students not be allowed to read and discuss this book when the larger issue of racism is still very apparent in today's society. Webb states that "controversial issues are a part of the learning process" (p. 109), and I wholeheartedly agree. Is it not the truth that the portrayls of slavery and white / black relations present in the novel were very much a part of American history? Sure there may be some exaggerations or use of foul language, but won't students be subjected to these same issues outside of the classroom anyway? And I am aware that many believe that Twain depicted Jim from a white, stereotypical point of view, but what about A.A. authors who have done the same with their A.A. characters, i.e. Walker's construction of Celie in The Color Purple? Although Twain's beliefs about A.A. seem contradictory, doesn't it reflect a deeper sentiment present in America at that time? I guess what I am trying to get at is that even if Twain sent mixed messages about race and the nature of the A.A, he too can be subject to criticism while reading the novel.

Although I can see the novel being taught in high schools without using a New Critical perspective, I am still questioning two big issues raised in the chapter, and I'm not sure the author has resolved them for me. 1) How do you address using the racial ephitet that appears 213 times? and 2) how can you ensure that the A.A. students present do not feel uncomfortable or are looked to as an "expert" when talking about race relations?

Webb, Chap. 2

After reading this chapter, it was clear to me that the issue of homelessness could definitely be integrated into a literature course considering the plethora of novels that address the issue. What is more important is the ambiguity of the causes of homelessness, and as Webb's students began questioning these causes, the issue became particularly relevant to me. Rather than just seeing these people as "lazy" or unfortunate, it was worthwhile to consider social and environmental factors that contributed to their statuses. It was also refreshing to see how students became concerned with how homelessness affected their community and school.

When Webb began discussing New Criticism, I did not initially see the connection he was trying to make. The introduction to the literary theory seemed out of place organizationally, until of course he described how this theory led some students to question the relevance of the homelessness issue. Webb states that his students wanted to learn about characters and other literary elements instead of examining historical and cultural perspectives. These students were like me, thinking that close readings of texts and paying close attention to the language was what reading literature was all about. But again, as I am coming to realize, these students need to be reminded to step out of their comfort zones to examine the bigger factors that come to play in these novels, i.e. cultural, social, and political factors.

I want to very briefly mention a concern that was raised during our last class, one about negative or depressing subjects being at the center of cultural studies. Webb states that "Cultural studies does not confine English classes to merely sober or depressing subjects such as the Holocaust or poverty, as important as these issues are" (p. 26). If not, than what are some more inspiring topics...?

Appleman Chap. 4

"This is a particularly appropriate moment in the history of literacy education to introduce Marxist literary theory into our classrooms" (p. 59). Although I haven't even heard of the Marxist lens until about two weeks ago, I feel that examining political and social issues, especially the issue of class or socioeconomic status, is very important. It seems that nearly every novel has some ties to the issue of class struggle, usually the struggle for power during times of affliction or great prosperity. The catalyst of this struggle is clearly competing ideologies, which is also a part of Marxist criticism. One group or class is always seen as superior/inferior to others, and this is no different in American society today and throughout history. Those who have money have power. It is useful to examine this phenomenon because our students inevitably come from various social classes; Appleman seconds this by stating "As we acknowledge the diverse backgrounds and perspectives of the students who will read and discuss literary texts together, we also might acknowledge the need to consider particular issues of race and class deliberately and thoughtfully" (p. 59). Whenever issues of class are discussed, like the students talking about Hamlet, I feel there may be some resistance by students to talk about their own economic statuses. How do we as teachers avoid students becoming afraid to talk about their social classes, or should this issue of "uncomfortabilty" with one's own social class be directly exploited?

MCTE Fall 2007 Conference Reactions

The fall 2007 conference was my second MCTE conference in three years (attended fall 2005), and each time I attend I walk away with several wonderful, novel teaching strategies and/or ideas to bring into the English language arts classroom. Whether the presentations cover technology in the classroom, peer teaching, writer’s workshop or expanding literacy practices, they all provide teachers and future teachers alike with ways to enrich language arts instruction. Further, and most importantly, these presentations attempt to make reading and writing more meaningful to the students.
The keynote address was given by the incoming president of the NCTE, Kathleen Blake Yancey, and her focus was on “21st Century literacy.” We were asked to define this phrase, and in doing so words such as technology and networking unanimously filled responses. Throughout her address Yancey stressed using a wide-range of technologies, or literacies. Additionally, she emphasized that texts are constantly being enhanced by computers, and we must explicitly show students how to navigate these programs.
Although I garnered many quality ideas from the sessions I attended, her address was the presentation which really hit home for me. Due to computers and the internet, there has never been a time in history where so much information is widely available to the citizenry; thus, students can explore texts in multiple ways. But if they do not know how to access this information, it is useless to them. Any opportunity technology provides to further explore texts or other English language arts topics should be seized by the teacher. Moreover, when students and teachers are networked outside of the classroom (weblogs, myspace, etc) it will inevitably increase performance.
Coinciding directly with the technology theme was the Session B presentation on digital storytelling, given by two Michigan high school teachers from the greater Grand Rapids area. Instead of just writing a story or response, students can have fun (doesn’t this exist anymore!?) using a plethora of multimedia to bring their story to life by incorporating music, narrative and images. The digital story can be as simplistic as a slide show or as advanced as a mini-movie, and it can include the informational, persuasive, or evaluative genres. Usually a project such as the digital story should span approximately a two-week period, where students are given time to learn how to use programs such as Windows Movie Maker or Imovie for the Mac. Not only are the students using technology and other downloadable programs, they are allowed to make critical decisions that enhance their unique story or report. I am a little apprehensive, however, about the copyright issues, but the teachers’ pages on Wikispaces gives several links that discuss what can be taken and what cannot.

Webb Chap. 5

"The way we think about Shakespeare's day has great implications for the way we think about Shakespeare's Plays...developing conceptions of history that connect Shakespeare's time and our own, offer to resuce Shakespeare from an abstract 'greatness'..." (p. 80). It seems that the more and more I read about new historicism--or cultural materialism--the more logical it has become for me as a future teacher to examine the historical, social and cultural contexts in which a literary work either contains or refers to. How could so much of my secondary school literary instruction neglect the historical and cultural lenses? When a historical perspective is broadened or naturally used in conjunction with a cultural studies approach, students simply have more information helping them to make meaning of or attach significance to that particular work. These approaches seem even more logical because many students seem to be intimidated by Shakespeare's use of language. Additionally, since a majority of his plays were written during the 16th Century, it is imperative that students understand what fueled Shakespeare's writings; this can only help clarify students' misconceptions. For example as Webb states, students are often mystified by his "abstract greatness," meaning they often believe Shakespeare is relevant and necessary to study simply because the teacher said so. As the quotation references, much of this 'greatness' comes from Shakespeare's inclusion of his surroundings and references to other significant historical events in his writing; examining them will nevertheless enrich students' explorations of Shakespeare.

Carey-Webb, A. (2001). Literature and Lives: A Response-Based, Cultural Studies Approach to Teaching English. Chap. 1

The genesis of Webb's integration of reader response and cultural studies is the primary focus of chapter 1. He admits he basically stumbled across the idea when he began teaching a unit concerning the Holocaust in his Contemporary World Literature course. Interestingly enough, Webb states that his teaching began to move away from a narrow emphasis on literature to one with broader cultural and historical significances. What I found most helpful, however, from this chapter was the mutualism, per se, that existed between the two literary theories. Webb acknowledges that reader response can be a little ignorant of the text and what literature means when it is the only theory used. Similarly, employing cultural studies alone may tend to lineate student thought. But if cultural studies is used to fuel reader response, I feel as if the benefits could be innumerable for both the teacher and students. Instead of trying to find some character to directly relate to, they are supplemented with a cultural context which extends the text to include film, etc. to base their connections on. When students are asked to examine issues and cultures which are unfamiliar to them, they are inevitably raising their global awareness. Consequently, they are less likely to hold preconceived notions about a particular group of people or things. If we as teachers don't take the time to examine diversity, we are implicitly perpetuating prejudice. For these reasons alone, cultural studies seems like a valid approach.

Appleman Chap. 3

I have always been under the impression that connecting with the text via personal experiences is the best way to get students to make meaning of what they are reading. Appleman argues, however, that this process implemented in reader-response criticism has become oversimplified and often ignores a knowledge of context. She includes a quotation from Bruce Pirie (1997) which reads "I am, however, suspicious of the suggestion that just expressing your personal response is a satisfactory educational attainment, or that such a response could be evaluated for its authenticity" (p. 28).

Although I believe that reader-response is a good way for students to appreciate and become interested in literature, I am suspicious too that the reader simply expressing his or her thoughts may become trivialized and lack sufficient support from the text. But some have said that reader-response criticism is the only way to reach students. I guess this then brings up the issue of will everybody benefit from a wide-range of theories, even those students who are 'at-risk'? Can the reader-response limit the literary interpretive capacities of students? What about the real differences, as opposed to similarities, that exist between a text and the reader? Further, how can you enrich or validate a student's experience since it is unique? These criticisms of reader response speak directly to the cliche 'too much of a good thing can be a bad thing.' Yes it may be the case that students aren't learning enough about a literary work via reader-response, but it does have it's benefits. A simple compromise: Use reader-response in conjunction with other theories. If we use reader-response in moderation, not for all readings, students are less likely to be devoid of meaning when they feel a text does not relate to their personal experiences. Man, Appleman sure is on top of her game!

Appleman Chap. 2

Appleman does a wonderful job of making the reader understand the importance of acknowledging multiple perspectives in teaching literature with the opening vignettes. The activities extend the literature and ask the students to acknowledge others' points of view. These examples resonate with the important idea that there is always more than one way of examining a situation. In other words, there are two sides to every story. This seems like a simple ideology, but it is very difficult to get some students to think outside themselves. I feel as educators, it is our duty to objectively present multiple perspectives with anything we teach--especially literature--because students will inevitably be placed in thousands, millions of situations where considering someone else's position will help them make better decisions. Instead of immediately passing judgment, first realizing why someone may have acted the way they did can be an enlightening experience.

To attempt to answer my question posed in the chapter 1 blog, 'Is explicitly teaching literary theory worthwhile?', I really like the idea of introducing literary theories after discussing multiple perspectives, since in essence, this is what literary theories embody. The handout given in Martha's twelfth-grade AP class that explains characteristics of prominent literary theories (appendix) after the lessons on different perspectives seems like a logical, smooth transition. I was initially uneasy about students experiencing information overload with a handout on literary theories, but whatever happened to holding high expectations? Just making students aware of these theories will help them be prepared to read texts in different ways. Instead, her students would be using them to explore various texts. Additionally, I found it relieving when Appleman asserts that she may go weeks without applying theory, and sometimes it is not until a student implicitly references a theory when she uses it. Any instructional material or strategy which gives students more options to respond/analyze literature can and should be employed; therefore, it is my belief that yes, teaching literary theories can be worthwhile.

Appleman, D. (2000). Critical Encounters in High School English: Teaching Literary Theory to Adolescents. Chap. 1

In the opening chapter Deborah Appleman makes the case for 1) explicitly teaching literary theory to high school students and 2) employing a wide-range of literary theories to teach various texts. To me, at this point, literary theories are merely different ways to interpret texts. Each theory has a different perspective and context in which to focus on with a given text. It is easy to point out which texts could be explored through, for example, a feminist perspective; however, I am unsure which theories will best help students make meaning of other texts... Awareness of these 'critical lenses' will enable students to better reflect and respond to texts and as she states "the guiding assumption of the book is that the direct teaching of literary theory in secondary English classes will better prepare adolescent readers to respond reflectively and analytically to teach texts, both 'canonical" and multicultural' (p. 2).

Before I began reading the book I had never really thought about various literary theories, and ironically, my final English methods course, English 4800, is my first introduction to them. Nevertheless, after I read chapter one I felt like I was given plenty of motivation to learn more about literary theories and the benifits of their implementation in high school English classes. Having garnered a little more information about the various contemporary literary theories which exist, it is clear that in my high school English classes, New Critical theory was the predominant one. The book mentions the balancing act between New Critical and Reader Response, but I rarely was asked to connect my personal experiences to the literature I was reading. My teacher was the main interpreter, and most of our time was spent searching for literary elements, especially overarching themes.

With that being said, I've thought of some questions worth answering. First, is explicitly teaching literary theory worthwhile? Should multiple theories find their way into the English language arts classroom, or is connecting personal experiences to literature (i.e. Reader Response) merely enough to evoke reflection/analysis? Has anyone else in Eng. 4800 class been in a classroom that touched on several literary theories and used different ones to teach different texts? Additionally, I think Appleman's 'questions addressed' section is important topic of discussion, hmmm...

Wilhelm Chap. 6

'I think though, that we need to ask what our purposes are as (English language arts) teachers: to teach texts, or to develop readers who can and will want to engage with and know texts in peronally powerful ways throughout their lives' (p. 145)? For me, the answer to this question is obvious. We as teachers of English need to develop readers and begin to have students reevaluate their commonly held beliefs about reading and its benifits. The easiest way to being to do so is to provide students access to a wide-varitey of literature.

Surely, "the classics" have certain political, social, and cultural significance, and I feel that they should be implemented based on an indivdual class' needs, but in a rapidly changing technological era in which information is readily available, students need to be given changes to explore several literary genres. Young adult novels, newspapers, magazines, comic books and other peices of literature need to be options for students. Students will never learn to appreciate literature if it is constantly being 'forced down their throats,' so why not allow them to pursue works that interest them? Furthermore, this issue of access coincides with the idea of acknowledging students' interest and providing them with as many choices as possible; thus we can, at the very least, begin to erase the stigma attached to reading. Consequently, when students bring a positive attitude when they are about to engage with a text, their is a better chance that they will take on an active role.

After reading Wilhelm's book, like any, there are still some questions that plague me. 1) How do we get students to evaluate literature with a critical eye, meaning investigating author purpose, credibility and bias?; 2) Which 'classics' are worth teaching, and is it plausible to choose certain classics based on an individual classes interests / needs?; and 3) How can we move past the constraints of curricula that ask us as teachers to adhere to the canonical perspective? I will be searching for the answers throughout this semester and long into my teaching career. Any suggestions are welcomed...

Wilhelm Chap. 5

'We cannot know through language what we cannot imagine. The image--visual, tactile, auditory--plays a crucial role in the construction of meaning through text. Those who cannot imagine cannot read' (p. 120). This quotation in Wilhelm, taken from Eisner (1992), basically sums up the chapter. For some reason Wilhelm's few students documented as struggling readers failed to "see" things when they read. Again, I want to touch on the use of guided imagery to reach these types of students. This task asks students to draw a picture of what they see when they are read a particular scene from a story aloud. The scene should be one that naturally induces imagery, and when students are read to aloud, they may be able to envision objects moreso than when they read. Think of it basically as students explicitly practicing producing images in your head. It is a relatively short exercise, so depending on the severity of the concerns that students aren't imagining when they read, guided imagery could be done weekly to daily. The task may not instantly help students produce images in their minds, but with enough practice they will begin to use the strategies when they read themselves.

The other visualization techniques described definitely help, in conjuction with one another, students to begin producing images as they read. I like how Wilhem refers to this as art, because techniques like these aren't really offered anywhere else, except for maybe the art class. These techniques also help students develop their abstract thinking skills, which many students tend to lack. Drawing pictures, cutting out symbols that represent objects or characters from a text, performing read alouds with illustrated books, etc. all help students envision story, and as Wihelm suggests, visualizing helps students better remember what they read.

Wilhelm Chap. 4

On a broad note, I want to make it clear that it is my belief that the incorporation of drama into the literature will help reach more struggling readers than if it were to entirely be excluded from the activites of the class. Whether this number of students is significant I am unsure; however, one thing is clear: Dramatizations cannot be counterproductive with regards to meaning making if time is managed effectively. Pulling in all readers, including reluctant ones, is a fundamental goal of literature instruction, and any task which allows more readers to connect with a text is worthwhile. More specifically, when students are asked to recreate and enact a scene from a text, it will inevitably provide them with a deeper understanding of that scene; this ultimately leads them to begin becoming 'active participants'--as Wilhelm calls it--of the text. Additionally, it is important that these reenactments be done in groups, because not only do you usually need more than a few characters per scene but especially for readers who still struggle to interact with the text.

When I initally thought of incorporation drama into the classroom, my thoughts were limited to reenacting scenes from a particular text. But when I saw the various types of activites Wilhelm used in his classroom (pp. 100-01), it is obvious that the concept of dramatization entails much more. During my high school experiences with literature I have done such tasks as role playing, guided imagery and newscasts, but I've never thought of the idea students filling in textual gaps, an activity which Wilhelm refers to as "missing scene scripts." I really like what opportunities this activity affords students. First, it enables students to use their to logical reasoning skills to assume what would happen in these missing scenes. Second, their interpretations require justifications based on what has already occured in the story. Third, they are given creative license to possibly explore alternate story possibilites. If nothing else, activites like these will get students to actively participate in thier meaning making process, as opposed to the traditionally passive question-answer forum.

Wilhelm Chap 3

Wilhelm touches on various reader's response techniques, and I am very interested in two of them. The first are the visual protocols and second is the "Symbolic Story Representation" (SRI).
We always are reminded of the different learning styles which teachers must accommodate, and the visual protcols are a reminder that visual learners are actually out there. I like this strategy and I have actually studied a similar technique called guided imagery. As the name suggests, students are allowed to draw a picture that represents something or someone from what they have just read. What I like even more about the visual protocols that Wilhelm mentions is that they allow for a combination of writing and drawing. Being able to do both will empower students and even lead to interpretations of eachother's drawings. When students compare their drawings with one another, they will be suprised with how many different pictures can represent the same story. Let me mention that some who aren't confident with their art might feel a little apprehensive about sharing their work. Thus the sharing can take place in small groups. If there is a classroom community of learners established hinging on mutual respect, students should not fear sharing their work. Students should always be encouraged to develop mental images as they read, and the visual protocols take those images one step further.

I have never heard of the SRI, but it has so many potential benefits that I do not know how I'm not familar with this response strategy. First, the SRI is an alternative to the monotony of answering convergent summary and thematic questions while still urging students to look at these ideas. Second, the cutting out of shapes to represent thems, motifs, symbols, characters etc. brings a creative element to responding to literature. I'm convinced that in order to reach all readers, including those who struggle, it is necessary to foster creativity, and the SRI does just that. Third, it provides an opportunity to decorate the classroom with students' work. Fourth, it enables students to compare their cutouts with one another and to justify why they cutout a particular representation.

I want to leave by briefly touching on the idea of evaluating an author which is mentioned in Wilhelm's four "reflective dimensions" of response. I don't think many students realize enough what the author's purpose or intended audience is when they read. Often times they see an author as the omnicent speaker of truth. I'm not totally sure how to switch students to this critical mode of thinking, but we as teachers should continually encourage students to question the texts that they are reading, and this includes agreeing/disagreeing with an author's idea or political ideology. When student's are "trained" to examine the author's purpose by examining the historical context in which it was written, they can begin to see how effective or ineffective her writing is.

Wilhelm Chap. 2

During the conversations that Wilhelm had with three "good" students and lovers of reading, the students voice their attitudes toward reading. One common response was that they read in order to learn and experience enjoyment. This struck me as interesting because it is obvious that a majority of students do not spend enough time reading. This overwhelming number of students who don't read have the attitude that reading isn't enjoyable, nor do they see it as personally gratifying. If only every student could sit down with a text and think to himself "All right, what will this book provide me with that I could not experience in any other way?" Reading is no different than any other task or hobby people perform. To become better at it one must practice. Further, the notion of simply having an open mind and a positive perspective when sitting down to read can make reading that much more enjoyable. Perhaps it is the several summary questions students are usually required to answer after or during reading a particular text which doesn't allow students to adopt a postitive attitude toward reading. I guess this is leading to the question of how can we change the negative attitudes of students who begin to read? Is it to provide them with texts that speak directly to adolescent issues such as identity, love and autonomy or is it something more deep such as moving pass the stigma of reading as something "nerds" do? I hope to discover some answers as I read on...

Also worth noting is the perspective one of the three students, Cora, had on character-reader relationships. She refered to literary characters as 'people [she] knew.' Realizing that literary characters, although fictional, have characteristics and tendencies as illuminated by that author that are very real is important in achieving deep engagment with a text. Cora's claim seems directly in contrast with struggling readers' perspectives that characters in stories are strictly what their genre suggests, purely fictional. If English language arts teachers can explicitly explain to students to look at various facets of literary characters and encourage them to juxtapose these characters with people students have encountered in their own lives, they may begin to see texts as more meaningful.

Wilhelm, J.D. (1997). 'You Gotta BE the Book.' Chap. 1

I want to start by commenting on the literary theory known as New Criticism. I admit I am not well versed in literary theory, but when Wilhelm begins describing its characteristics, I was immediately brought back to taking the reading comprehension section of a standardized test. A single correct interpretation of a literary work doesn't seem too inviting for students, and in fact, it seems very closed minded. If we want students to become engaged in the text they must be allowed to make their own judgments, predictions, and conclusions without fear of these assumptions being different from the standard interpretation. This includes asking students to be aware of the emotions or feelings that arise or what parts of the texts pique their interests when they read. Another possible way to combat this is simply to foster multiple interpretations by frequently posing divergent questions. Identifying and discussing potential/similar situations that arise in texts which students may have experienced is also a means of achieving this goal.

Wilhelm also mentions the distinction between 1.) "efferent," or information-seeking reading, and 2.) "aesthetic" reading, or reading for enjoyment. As the author suggests, the majority of reading that students are asked to take part in is for the acquiring of information. Speaking from my experience as a student, generally students will look at questions on a study guide or questionnaire and skim the material to find answers. This constant probing for answers makes students see reading as a mechanical, tedious task, rather than an enjoyable, meaning-making "quest." The big question that remains is how do we switch students into the aesthetic mode? On one hand, I would say it is giving them reading material that they are interested in as they search for answers to their own questions that result from their shared experiences. On the other hand, how do we create a balance between providing material that is of interest to them and material that the teacher deems important without losing the motivation of the readers?