DANGER: Difficulty Ahead

The class took the survey on the Discourse Analysis Journal (DAJ) assignment, and I think the (very initial) results of it and the conversation that followed are interesting. First, a methodological issue: the survey featured 24 statements about the DAJ divided into five sections—engagement with the assignment, understanding of the central function of the assignment, difficulty with the assignment, use of the assignment in other areas of the course, and assessment of the assignment. For each statement, the student could choose between “agree, somewhat agree, neutral, somewhat disagree, disagree.” We spoke for a while about the use of “neutral” as an option. Some students thought that it allowed for passive, cop-out responses. And there is apparently research that supports this idea. In putting together the survey, I wasn’t uncomfortable with including “neutral.” I thought it gave students an option for those statements on which they haven’t taken a position on. But the more I think about the case against “neutral” the more I wish I had left it off. Doing so would have required the students to take a position—and if they hadn’t thought one through on a particular statement, they could then use the survey to come to a position. That’s what action research is supposed to do—nudge the researcher and the participants toward a better understanding of what’s going on in the class. Perhaps if we’re given the “neutral” option, we don’t get nudged.

I have to spend some time with the survey sheets before I can post any thoughtful conclusions. My first reaction is that the students have resisted seeing the DAJ as “busy work,” for the most part, but that they are having some difficulty using the assignment as a bridge between the course readings and the class activities. It will be interesting to see how the responses break down according to year, major, and gender.

Something I’m trying to do in this class is to get students comfortable with the idea of difficulty—with the notion that education is hard, and that we should value it because it is hard. A problem with traditional higher education is that difficulty is often defined in terms of workload. More classes, more reading, more papers, more things to study—the more you have the harder school is. But this is all so quantitative. And I think many students (and institutions) have defined academic success as the ability to gulp and store information. The more on the plate, the more difficult the education. This quantitative definition of “difficult” has led to an educational system of niche scheduling and passive infotainment downloading.

What became clear in class yesterday was that students are uncomfortable in the face of the difficult. Yeah, that makes sense. But what doesn’t is how quickly that discomfort translates into avoidance or passivity. Difficulty in cognitive terms—in the sense that it can mean a cognitive dissonance, or a sense of confusion, or a challenge to accepted ideas—this kind of difficulty has been given a negative connotation. It seems that to find something difficult in the cognitive sense—as opposed to the physical sense as typified in the heavy workloads—is to find oneself lacking in intellectual ability or experiences. Well, that may be true—but neither lack is a bad thing. But both can be used as excuses not to deal with the difficult or to allow the difficult to be explained for us. A number of students have said the equivalent of “I’ve never done this stuff before.” To which I reply, “Of course you haven’t—and that’s good.” If they had done it before, I would wonder why they are in the class.

The beauty of the difficult (as I like to call it) is that it often opens us to new ways of thinking and doing—to different approaches and different ways of being. To shun the difficult is to think of education as a tailor-made suit—expensive and well-fit, but too easy to get in and out of.

In some ways the class needs to build a better sense of trust—among the students and between the students and me. I do think we’re on our way, though I’m troubled by the students who sit in class confused and silent and don’t come to see me. And by those who stay away from the class meetings when readings or assignments are due. Yet, I’m heartened by those who are embracing the de-centered nature of the class, and by those who aren’t afraid to comment and to ask questions.

If we come to trust each other as people working toward the same goals, then I think the difficult can be embraced as a chance for all of us to change and to learn to see the world in different ways.

Other notes: many students would like to see the course materials applied to “real-world” texts—and we’ll certainly be doing that soon. The Katrina casebook is almost set. But I think I should try to bring in texts to accompany each reading. I’m hoping to find some pieces on the Correta Scott King funeral to illustrate competing cultural models.