I will add a follow-up question to the one of "how much ground to give to students?"
How much ground can collegiate institutions as a whole give before they bankrupt the point of collegiate education? I have studies going back to 2010 that this already occurred at community colleges. This links into another concern, which is the disjunct between what academics think of academia and what the general populace does, and how that rift may be fueled by the typical academic practices of low-tier colleges, which teach the vast majority of American collegiate students. That is, professors may be far more complicit in what Josh called the "foreign invasion of academia" than we think. this line of thinking takes the initial question into divergent directions, e.g., professor teaching preparedness, public perception of the purpose of college, how the aforesaid drives the contemporary teacher-student dynamic, etc.
"How much ground should writers give in order to reach the average reader?"
Well, I am probably going to miss the mark as far as you and Jason are concerned, but in my book the answer to this should be "none". I'm not suggesting that writing should be made deliberately or ridiculously too difficult to read, but I do think that there comes a point where readers should rise to the level of the work, not have the work dumbed down to meet the reader.
I did a course last year (as a student) and I found it incredibly difficult -- a good way of demolishing one's self-esteem is to discover that despite being pretty literate you're way out of your depth. But when, as a result of reading, discussing, repeat for months on end, and endless drafts of the final essay, I came out with a really good evaluation and an even better sense of self-worth.
The only case for dumbing down, if I can put it that way, would be in the hope that it entices the reader to read the real thing or read an authors other works. An example of each of these would be:
1. I became interested in great works of literature by reading Classics Illustrated.
2. I became interested in Melville y being introduced to him through Bartleby, like your students. (I haven't acted upon that interest yet, but I will).
Other than similar scenarios, I can't see that lowering standards helps anyone, least of all students or readers.
I will add a follow-up question to the one of "how much ground to give to students?"
How much ground can collegiate institutions as a whole give before they bankrupt the point of collegiate education? I have studies going back to 2010 that this already occurred at community colleges. This links into another concern, which is the disjunct between what academics think of academia and what the general populace does, and how that rift may be fueled by the typical academic practices of low-tier colleges, which teach the vast majority of American collegiate students. That is, professors may be far more complicit in what Josh called the "foreign invasion of academia" than we think. this line of thinking takes the initial question into divergent directions, e.g., professor teaching preparedness, public perception of the purpose of college, how the aforesaid drives the contemporary teacher-student dynamic, etc.
Can't wait! Thanks, Josh!
Where are you in your novel writing process?
"How much ground should writers give in order to reach the average reader?"
Well, I am probably going to miss the mark as far as you and Jason are concerned, but in my book the answer to this should be "none". I'm not suggesting that writing should be made deliberately or ridiculously too difficult to read, but I do think that there comes a point where readers should rise to the level of the work, not have the work dumbed down to meet the reader.
I did a course last year (as a student) and I found it incredibly difficult -- a good way of demolishing one's self-esteem is to discover that despite being pretty literate you're way out of your depth. But when, as a result of reading, discussing, repeat for months on end, and endless drafts of the final essay, I came out with a really good evaluation and an even better sense of self-worth.
The only case for dumbing down, if I can put it that way, would be in the hope that it entices the reader to read the real thing or read an authors other works. An example of each of these would be:
1. I became interested in great works of literature by reading Classics Illustrated.
2. I became interested in Melville y being introduced to him through Bartleby, like your students. (I haven't acted upon that interest yet, but I will).
Other than similar scenarios, I can't see that lowering standards helps anyone, least of all students or readers.
I love the chicken approach -- I hadn't come across that before.