Hi all
I've got a little slot now too, Jim, and 'should' be doing other things
- but I keep thinking about this 'skills' conversation ... it strikes me
that, whilst I do not like saying or using the terms 'writing skills' or
'speaking skills' etc (which seem to me to falsely solidify them into
supposedly existing 'things'), I am happier to talk about 'skills for
writing' and 'skills for speaking' ... somehow I feel that these latter
formulations can avoid the assumptions of fixity and independence from
context of the former .... If I say that I intend to help my students
develop their skills for reading (instead of reading skills), I am not
assuming I (or anyone else) already knows what those skills are - and I
can then negotiate with my students (or colleagues) in relation to
situation, prior knowledge and context ... and seek information about
needs ...
'Writing skills' is a stark nominalisation - i.e. it makes the subject
sound like a set of predetermined things - whereas, although I'm
struggling to put my finger on exactly why, 'skills for writing' seems
less rigid - to me it allows considerations of context since it more
readily begs the question WHAT skills, or what those skills might
consist of ...
Still thinking aloud, so apologies if it doesn't make sense, folks - I'm
trying to work it out rather than argue a strong case.... I still think
we need to problematise the notion of skills but my intuition says we
can't just remove the word or try to ban the concept, since it clearly
has powerful functions in current discourse - and would only get
replaced by something equally problematic such as 'abilities' ....
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Pye [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 29 November 2003 00:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: learning and skills
Hi,
I've been snowed under, can't keep up with any of it, but a student
hasn't turned up to an appointment, so I've dipped a toe in the
deepening water.
I like Lynne's response to this. It makes me think we need a ritual like
a gun amnesty: handing back certain terms; putting them beyond use.
Let's hand back the word skill, and force ourselves to think out what we
mean.
Jim
John Hilsdon wrote:
> Hi All
>
> in case others are interested in getting the/a ball rolling on this,
here's a question: how might we use the 'practices/ emergent identity
approach' (or any critical approach) in our everyday discourse in
responding to comments such as:
>
> "This exercise is designed to improve communication skills"
>
> "My students need teamworking skills"
>
> "How are skills being developed in this module?"
>
> What I mean by this is, in view of the criticisms of skills Len's work
raises, how might our use of language (e.g. the kinds of question we
could raise) help us 'unpack' some of the issues assumed/hidden/embedded
in the skills terminology?
>
> Anyone care to share thoughts?
>
> John
|