- Jul 2020
This model is the most flexible and open-ended of the four; your goal as an instructor is not to design a full-fledged semester of material, activities, and assessments. Rather, your goal is to work with your class to design and become a learning community, working collaboratively and individually towards your determined learning goals. For this to work you should have: a set of possible/preferred learning objectives for your classa library of course materials, preferably with as much as possible in digital formata suggested list of digital tools and technologies that you’re comfortable from with a list of possible assignment/project/assessment ideas that are related to your learning objectivesa willingness to experiment and invite your students into the teaching & learning process. At the onset of class you will need to facilitate a conversation among you and your students about how the class will unfold. This can be done in small groups f2f, via an online communication tool, or in a hybrid mix of both. As a community you should plan on addressing the following: what are our objectives as a learning community? what kind of work could we engage in to meet these objectives? what physical/virtual spaces would we like to work in? how/when do we want to meet in these spaces?how do we want to measure (assess) if an objective has been met?what rules and policies should govern our work? how will we work virtually and respect everyone’s boundaries and personal situations? how will we work f2f and respect public health recommendations and personal situations? You will probably need to spend at least the first 1-2 weeks answering these questions together and then designing a plan for your course. Make sure you and your students talk through various complications: what if the university’s policies about meeting f2f change? what if classes are forced to move entirely virtual/remote? what someone (students or professor!) gets sick?
This is the one for me!!!!
Apologies for highlighting whole swaths of paragraphs but it can't be helped sometimes lol.
Finally, these are NOT meant to be comprehensive. Instead, imagine these models along a continuum of opportunity. Your challenge is to determine where your courses could fit between and among the proposals.
I'm wondering how much or how little faculty will need to change their curriculum/delivery depending on the various inevitable changes that we can't exactly predict will happen this school year. For those faculty member purposefully switching online, what changes have they made already, and what changes will become necessary in the near future?
- Feb 2019
hey've perhaps almost lost thm,c excellent Capacities which probably were afforded them by nature for the highest things.
A sort of reverse tabula rasa. While this could be a sort of flourish, I don't read it as one.
If we take her at her word, Astell is suggesting that those (rational) capacities which are originally inherit to humans, can, through disuse, gradually recede into nothing.
I have lots of questions about how the hell it got there in the first place and how it goes away etc., but I suspect it has something to do with the imago Dei and the Fall.
- Aug 2018
I made him just and right, Sufficient to have stood, though free to fall.
Yes, and God also made mankind ignorant, with strong sensory appetites (for fruit like apples), with a desire for pleasure etc. etc. (I'm thinking of my mother who was so unattuned to childrearing that she expected me to act like an adult when I was 2 years old and punished me for acting by impulse according to reason). Just how much time did God spend teaching Adam and Eve how to control their desires, or role model such behavior for them?
It seems to me that anyone who is authoritarian and makes strong rules- especially for someone who is not yet really adult, experienced and knowledgeable -is asking for rebellion. The gestalt therapists speak of Topdog and Underdog. When there is an authoritarian Topdog, there's bound to be an Underdog who rebels. What's needed is to assimilate Topdog (integrating some facets of our SHOULDs and throwing out others that are not necessary), building a self in the process that it is NOT split in two. In Freudian terms, we're talking about a healthy ego that can help us integrate our id and superego rather than a strict superego that is authoritarian with a rebellious id. But the root of the Old Testament is such a split.
Adam and Eve were just born, right, though born as adults? (Personally, I think we can get beyond the split too of Creationism vs. Evolution. Why not view God as having given a lightning blast to chimpanzees which quickly led to ther evolving into humans?). So they weren't likely to have a lot of experience or become very mature yet. Of course they needed to go through the rebellious terrible twos!
In Greek mythology too, we have the first female Pandora who almost immediately after she is created is left in a room with a box and told that she must not open it. So she does, of course. Her curiosity gets the better of her. And so she is blamed for all the evil in the world, as Eve is blamed. Unfair!
Both of these situations are "set ups". What I don't understand is why God set up a test which Adam and Eve were bound to fail. So that he could fully assert His power over them?
The Old Testament seems to me to be based on a split consciousness with a Topdog God and an Underdog mankind. This is a kind of parent/child, authority /subordinate setup. But it is not the only way to live.
Yes, I'm trying to understand Milton, but in the process clarifying my own attitude toward his interpretation of The Fall AND that of the Bible and Christianity. As a Gnostic deeply influenced by Elaine Pagel's Gnostic Gospels and her Adam, Eve and the Serpent, I highly recommend these two books. To me, the make much more sense than the Fall in the Old Testament or the Miltonian interpretation.of it.
Those of us who are expressing our own views here abd criticizing Milton and the Bible (and certainly I'm doing a lot of it) may be at odds with those who are dedicated believers in the Bible and take Genesis literally. But I'd be happy to hear a variety of views.