October Really Is SPOOKY SEASON!

October took on a whole new level of spooky for me this year.... I mean, HOLY HELL. Graduate students in their second year had advised me to be ready for the haunted hayride that is October, but I was certainly not ready. Although this month thus far has been spooky and dark for me at times, I found a moment of light; a LIT moment, if you will. Surprisingly, my moment of light occurred during the intersectional challenge of Fish week and impromptu speeches in COMM 1010. I know right, spooky.

During Fish week, we had to prep for a debate over his teaching philosophy, and be prepared to debate the following week. This process was surprisingly difficult and included many road bumps for my group, and left me feeling emotionally taxed as I have such a blue personality. Nevertheless, we powered through, and the debate was spectacular (it was a success for our group if you ask me). Most importantly, this debate was just another thing that contributed to a difficult week for me, and I was beginning to feel imposter syndrome and excessively fatigued. However, I did learn an important part of my teaching philosophy from Fish week.

Although there are facets of Fish's philosophy with which I disagree, his aversion to acknowledge difference in the classroom stands out to me in particular. According to Fish, we should regard all students as equal citizens that are present to learn disregarding their backgrounds, differences, and values. WHAT?! It's 2019, how could I follow this philosophy? I simply couldn't, and impromptu week in COMM 1010 demonstrated that I could not and should not follow this part of Fish's philosophy.

I am sure most of you feel the same way when I say that impromptu week creates a new collective feeling in your classroom; one of high tension and high anxiety. As students got up in front of the class and either nailed it, bombed it, or entirely shied away from it, I found myself mentally giving each student an equal playing ground; in other words, I held all students to the same standard. However, I had a student come up to me before the speeches began to tell me that she had turrets, and I had another student tell me that they have Aspergers and are terrified of speaking in crowds. Aside from these two students, I had multiple foreign exchange students with language barriers who became fixated on finding the correct word for their thoughts in English. With this being the case, HOW on earth could I follow Fish's philiopshy and regard them all as equal, and simply disregard who they are? The answer is simple: I can't.

Instead, I took on Dannel's philosophy of democracy and took into account their backgrounds, who they are, where they are from, and/or their neurological divergence from their peers. Additionally, I simply graded on if they met the requirements of the impromptu speech structure and if they met the time limit requirements. As most of my students were terrified and felt defeated, they were so relieved to discover that they did not do as horribly as they thought. I saw their faces light up, and I have to say that it LIT up my week as well.

Fish week in particular was LIT for me because I saw some of my students feel proud of themselves, or they had the courage to redo their impromptu presentation; furthermore, I learned a significant facet of my teaching philosophy, and it was so enlightening. Sorry, Fish, can't say you're the Fish in the sea for me!

#It'sMADLit