There are some things about the English classes that I would like to analyze, because in my experience those classes have always showed some problems to achieve effectiveness. I don’t mean they are the result of a teacher poor work, for the contrary, the English teachers are always trying to solve the problems that the English Class presents in his nature. The examples will be my school experience and this class, and I`ll try to descript their differences and equalities.
In school, the English class system was very typical: a book with activities for reading and writing (fill with the missing word, answer to the question, put the sentence in order, etc). The listening was the same but less frequent (answer the questions after listening the tape). My class had the problem of being too crowded, like forty students and one teacher, so the routine was the teacher writing the “grammar focus” in the board and nobody doing nothing, except for the last five minutes of the class, when everybody copies the answers of those who know English since always.
Now, in university, there are a lot of things that show a more prepared class and some others that remind me the same problems that we had in school. The difference between these is motivated by two factors: a different disposition of the students, and the implementation of a few teaching techniques and technologies. The disposition is maybe the most important, the private classes, in the same direction, where students have to pay expensive prices, have also that advantage because the “client” force himself to carry out the tasks given. In school the disposition is blocked by the monotony of the method and the separation of those who know from those who don’t. So those who wanted to learn, in the beginning, realize then that it`s easier to give the minimum (using their classmate`s answers) because they feel that there`s something about English that is denied to them.
So the technologies (interactive writing in blogs) or the techniques (conversations with guidelines) are better received in university because the disposition is different: the labor structure tells us that every opportunity of gaining knowledge capital is an investment in our productive future, specially the English knowledge.But the problem is something that goes beyond the possibilities of a class. No matter how much technologies or pedagogical techniques are used, there is something that seems to be unable to be result with teaching. I thing that problem is related to the relation between English and the daily life of the student. A person who doesn`t has a daily relation with English, doesn`t has access to the core of language, and I think that is, a English way of thinking, not an ideology, a way of thinking that is strongly mixed with its language. That means that the possibility of a student of learning English is influenced by his social and economic situation, because, the signs in a more high society are always in a more intensive interaction with English signs.
viernes, 26 de noviembre de 2010
viernes, 19 de noviembre de 2010
faboritte vlog.
For today`s task I have to talk about my favorite classmate blog, and I think that’s Dani`s blog. I`m not the best blog reader but I think that now that I have to choose, looking here and there, her blog is fun and also a good example of someone who knows how to use the website.
I think it`s a good example of that because she changes the pictures in it and her site has links to her profile and animated pictures. For example, in her post about photographers she adds links to their works making reading more interactive. And that’s the best part of a blog, or the part that I think that must be carry out: to make the information something that connects you with more information in other websites. The difference between reading a book and reading a blog post is that the distance that separates the text that you are reading and the related information in other texts, in the case of internet, is none. You can look for a song you heard in the street be remembering two words of it and then searching in Google.
I liked her post about photography entitled “If the pictures aren`t good enough, you are not close enough” because she talks about meeting someone she admires. I think most of people fantasize about people they would like to know, live or death, but it`s not common to communicate it, I mean, it`s something that reminds me a way to imagine thinks without questioning if they are possible or not. Our thoughts are full of that kind of imagination, fantasies about objects that can exercise their influence in us without being real.
I think her blog is fun and a way to improve could be to exploit even more her knowledge of internet. She always have a good link related to the subject she`s writing about, and maybe that could be used to complement the information in a more developed way.
I think it`s a good example of that because she changes the pictures in it and her site has links to her profile and animated pictures. For example, in her post about photographers she adds links to their works making reading more interactive. And that’s the best part of a blog, or the part that I think that must be carry out: to make the information something that connects you with more information in other websites. The difference between reading a book and reading a blog post is that the distance that separates the text that you are reading and the related information in other texts, in the case of internet, is none. You can look for a song you heard in the street be remembering two words of it and then searching in Google.
I liked her post about photography entitled “If the pictures aren`t good enough, you are not close enough” because she talks about meeting someone she admires. I think most of people fantasize about people they would like to know, live or death, but it`s not common to communicate it, I mean, it`s something that reminds me a way to imagine thinks without questioning if they are possible or not. Our thoughts are full of that kind of imagination, fantasies about objects that can exercise their influence in us without being real.
I think her blog is fun and a way to improve could be to exploit even more her knowledge of internet. She always have a good link related to the subject she`s writing about, and maybe that could be used to complement the information in a more developed way.
viernes, 12 de noviembre de 2010
greatest
Once upon a time there was a man who was the greatest Chilean of all time. When he was young he never thought that he was going to become the greatest, tough his mother always told him that since he was born it was something not difficult to anticipate.
The early childhood of the greatest Chilean boy was full of changes; his father always told him that in order to achieve greatness a man has to be ready for new situations so he can make succeed from failure. The boy couldn`t make much friends because greatness cannot really be shared, so, most of the rest of his life he could only pay attention to his career.
When he was eighteen he got the “greatest Chilean teenager of the year” prize, his mother told the press that “all of the other kids were great, but great is not greatest”, his father for the other side didn`t make any coments besides: “a teenager prize from a every year contest…I guess that`s fine”.
The school ended and now it was time to choose what to do next. The mother made a meeting with all the great men of the family, she was not sure to be enough, so she invited the Mayor, the Priest and the biggest Chilean artist. They were all discussing about wich was the best option in order to achieve greatness. Finally the decision was made: an artist was a poor possibility, they always get some attention but generally after they die forgotten and without money. A priest wasn`t a good option either, his father said: “no man can be the greatest without knowing how a woman looks like”. The Mayor was the only one that didn’t defend his career, nobody knew why, but he said over and over again: “this is not a nice job...you know, fighting everybody, it only makes you get stomach aches, its better if you leave it to me, don’t worry…”
…to be continued?
The early childhood of the greatest Chilean boy was full of changes; his father always told him that in order to achieve greatness a man has to be ready for new situations so he can make succeed from failure. The boy couldn`t make much friends because greatness cannot really be shared, so, most of the rest of his life he could only pay attention to his career.
When he was eighteen he got the “greatest Chilean teenager of the year” prize, his mother told the press that “all of the other kids were great, but great is not greatest”, his father for the other side didn`t make any coments besides: “a teenager prize from a every year contest…I guess that`s fine”.
The school ended and now it was time to choose what to do next. The mother made a meeting with all the great men of the family, she was not sure to be enough, so she invited the Mayor, the Priest and the biggest Chilean artist. They were all discussing about wich was the best option in order to achieve greatness. Finally the decision was made: an artist was a poor possibility, they always get some attention but generally after they die forgotten and without money. A priest wasn`t a good option either, his father said: “no man can be the greatest without knowing how a woman looks like”. The Mayor was the only one that didn’t defend his career, nobody knew why, but he said over and over again: “this is not a nice job...you know, fighting everybody, it only makes you get stomach aches, its better if you leave it to me, don’t worry…”
…to be continued?
viernes, 5 de noviembre de 2010
House
I would like to talk about House M.D. cause I haven`t seen a movie in a while. I must say that this is the only serial I`ve ever followed completely: from the first episode of the first season to the last one of the sixth. I heard that there`s a book about dr. house “philosophy”, but that’s not interesting, I mean, there`s more to say about the serial, its structure, the reason of its succeed, etc.., than think about what relation can Nietzsche have with Gregory House (who doesn`t have a relation, aware or not, with Nietzsche?)
So, we all know how the story goes: the guy is a genius in medicine because of his ability to make a “differential”, which means an alternative diagnostic that is capable of explaining a rare case of disease. The other side of House`s life are human relations, and it is always suggested in the serial that, emotions, are territories where the doctor seems to be a little less prepared, we can see that hi keeps doing “differentials” but in situations of life that can only work when we don’t pay attention to them (natural egoism, instinct of self-preservation, conscience of loneliness, etc.) But we are making philosophy again.
We have to ask: what does House do to maintain his public? How do you explain that a seven season long serial can sustain itself when there`s not an important change in characters, locations or action? I think that a possible answer can be that the combination of two story lines creates an impressive effect on what people expects. These two story lines are: the short story about the medical case in every episode, and the long and slow story about House relations with himself and other people. The accomplish is to give you something for now and something to expect, so that way, you can feel that the episode have close its self but it has contribute to the main story line.
The secret ingredient is House`s particular personality. You can`t make a serial were the protagonist show himself like an empathic person and sustain that empathy forever. Usually, when that happens, the character starts to lose the capacity of impress, so the story writers focus in action, action must change, and action turns ridicule. Instead of that, what House does is to present the protagonist like someone who is not easily digestible, so you don’t get bored of his sympathy cause he`s always surprising us with new ways to mess around. Normally, all of the characters have more sympathy than House, but watching the serial, we start to understand that hi is in some estrange way, always right, so we have to confront the emotional sympathy that we feel for the normal character, against the rational sympathy that House provokes in us. In fact, that’s the normal ending structure from the first three seasons: we can see that house have solved the case because he realizes that his patience goodness was indeed a symptom and not an emotional and respectable characteristic of personality (for example), and then, we see that after all, his rational mind ends up alone in an always sad (“blue”) moment. That is a plus over the double effect I mentioned: it`s concluded the rational problem (disease), but it`s not enough because it doesn`t solve the relationship problem and it can actually make it worse.
So, we all know how the story goes: the guy is a genius in medicine because of his ability to make a “differential”, which means an alternative diagnostic that is capable of explaining a rare case of disease. The other side of House`s life are human relations, and it is always suggested in the serial that, emotions, are territories where the doctor seems to be a little less prepared, we can see that hi keeps doing “differentials” but in situations of life that can only work when we don’t pay attention to them (natural egoism, instinct of self-preservation, conscience of loneliness, etc.) But we are making philosophy again.
We have to ask: what does House do to maintain his public? How do you explain that a seven season long serial can sustain itself when there`s not an important change in characters, locations or action? I think that a possible answer can be that the combination of two story lines creates an impressive effect on what people expects. These two story lines are: the short story about the medical case in every episode, and the long and slow story about House relations with himself and other people. The accomplish is to give you something for now and something to expect, so that way, you can feel that the episode have close its self but it has contribute to the main story line.
The secret ingredient is House`s particular personality. You can`t make a serial were the protagonist show himself like an empathic person and sustain that empathy forever. Usually, when that happens, the character starts to lose the capacity of impress, so the story writers focus in action, action must change, and action turns ridicule. Instead of that, what House does is to present the protagonist like someone who is not easily digestible, so you don’t get bored of his sympathy cause he`s always surprising us with new ways to mess around. Normally, all of the characters have more sympathy than House, but watching the serial, we start to understand that hi is in some estrange way, always right, so we have to confront the emotional sympathy that we feel for the normal character, against the rational sympathy that House provokes in us. In fact, that’s the normal ending structure from the first three seasons: we can see that house have solved the case because he realizes that his patience goodness was indeed a symptom and not an emotional and respectable characteristic of personality (for example), and then, we see that after all, his rational mind ends up alone in an always sad (“blue”) moment. That is a plus over the double effect I mentioned: it`s concluded the rational problem (disease), but it`s not enough because it doesn`t solve the relationship problem and it can actually make it worse.
viernes, 24 de septiembre de 2010
Mapuche and preservation
Those are a lot of questions indeed. The Mapuche conflict is older than our republic, but it has change in time: the idea of conservation of a culture was not in the mind of the Spanish conqueror and either in the young Chilean nation. So, there are things that must be set apart, because we can´t judge people from a hundred or two hundred year ago based in the moral structure that we now maintain. The idea of a culture that must be protected because of its relation with our identity, is a modern idea. We first had to became a modern nation (incapable of living in real communities) to see those who still are, like something that must be conserved. But why? Is a strange problem, because the argument to defend the rights of the Mapuche is not only that they have the normal people right to live as they want, it`s also the idea that there is something in their way of life that must be preserved because it says something about our past. I can understand that if you talk about buildings, nature, books, etc. but people?... where does the right to ask for exceptional rights resides?
The conflict starts when the modern structure crashes with the conservation of a different structure, in this case, the Mapuche structure. We have to live in a capitalist constructed system, but inside of it, must be reserved some space for those who have inherited the right to live as the culture of their fathers have been. If the ancestral tradition says that from the river to the mountain is the domain of some Mapuche family, but the modern system tell us that those lands are part of a private field, then an exception must be made to preserve the “normal” functioning of the culture that we are protecting. There`s a problem there, of course, because how can we pretend to conserve a culture as it is, knowing that the space for it to stay, is an exceptional and modern space? Can we think that the Mapuche can keep being as they were inside their anthropologic museum? How can we really solve the problem if, not to preserve is fascist, and preserve is an illusion of modern anthropologic museum-ism?
The conflict starts when the modern structure crashes with the conservation of a different structure, in this case, the Mapuche structure. We have to live in a capitalist constructed system, but inside of it, must be reserved some space for those who have inherited the right to live as the culture of their fathers have been. If the ancestral tradition says that from the river to the mountain is the domain of some Mapuche family, but the modern system tell us that those lands are part of a private field, then an exception must be made to preserve the “normal” functioning of the culture that we are protecting. There`s a problem there, of course, because how can we pretend to conserve a culture as it is, knowing that the space for it to stay, is an exceptional and modern space? Can we think that the Mapuche can keep being as they were inside their anthropologic museum? How can we really solve the problem if, not to preserve is fascist, and preserve is an illusion of modern anthropologic museum-ism?
viernes, 27 de agosto de 2010
I am not the best news reader, it`s not a common thing to do, you know, reading newspapaers or web pages, at least not for me. I wonder why...maybe it`s because
I feel that the relation between us and the news is always a distant one. My best example is the last summer earthquake.
We were in a hill...things happened so fast, we could see little lights desapear in the sea, maybe ships, but nothing was clear. What kind of news can you recive there?, is it usefull to know that five people have allready died?, is something going to change if the president is in his house or in his way to who knows where?
Some say that we should have being warned...can we blame them for not to?, maybe yes, but, why didn`t I spected?, for example. Maybe the reason why I can`t be interested in newspapers it`s the same that makes me think that there`s nobody there taking care of you.
I remember the sound of the birds, runing scared from what was disturbing their water beds. Before that, the earthquake was a joke, a fun moment, an adventure for young stupid kids. After those birds and the wave that woke them up, all life came to present, death was there, showing us his face in visions that can`t be avoided.
You could only run. A friend was helping a man that have lost his son durning the earthquake, they were serching for the kid, thinking that maybe he runned away with his mother...when the wave came, I thought that it was imposible to save my friend...he was far away from us, maybe two blocks, what can I do?..I better run for my life..
After all, he joined us in our escape through the street, and I felt good knowing that he was alive...but I didin`t stop, I never stop running beacuse I was taking care of my own.
I have come to this beacause I belive that an experience like that, somehow, showed me that we can trust in others, take care of them, but, can we sacrifice?, realy sacrifice?...can we expect them to sacrifice for us?...can we blame people that didn`t warned us?...maybe I would have fail as they did.
I feel that the relation between us and the news is always a distant one. My best example is the last summer earthquake.
We were in a hill...things happened so fast, we could see little lights desapear in the sea, maybe ships, but nothing was clear. What kind of news can you recive there?, is it usefull to know that five people have allready died?, is something going to change if the president is in his house or in his way to who knows where?
Some say that we should have being warned...can we blame them for not to?, maybe yes, but, why didn`t I spected?, for example. Maybe the reason why I can`t be interested in newspapers it`s the same that makes me think that there`s nobody there taking care of you.
I remember the sound of the birds, runing scared from what was disturbing their water beds. Before that, the earthquake was a joke, a fun moment, an adventure for young stupid kids. After those birds and the wave that woke them up, all life came to present, death was there, showing us his face in visions that can`t be avoided.
You could only run. A friend was helping a man that have lost his son durning the earthquake, they were serching for the kid, thinking that maybe he runned away with his mother...when the wave came, I thought that it was imposible to save my friend...he was far away from us, maybe two blocks, what can I do?..I better run for my life..
After all, he joined us in our escape through the street, and I felt good knowing that he was alive...but I didin`t stop, I never stop running beacuse I was taking care of my own.
I have come to this beacause I belive that an experience like that, somehow, showed me that we can trust in others, take care of them, but, can we sacrifice?, realy sacrifice?...can we expect them to sacrifice for us?...can we blame people that didn`t warned us?...maybe I would have fail as they did.
viernes, 20 de agosto de 2010
Hi
Today I´ll talk about my experience in 2010 sanfic, it isn´t much, actually is not even close to an overview of the event, but what can I do?, thats all what I got.
Sanfic, for what I know, it´s an audiovisual festival that gathers diferent kind of directors from Chile and some foreing to. The idea is to create an instance where chilean artist can show their work and, ofcourse, recive the attention of nacional and international public and critics.
I went there, yesterday, at Hoyts cinema in La Reina, because a friend of my was going to show his short film. It started at two thirty p.m. and I was finishing my breakfast at two fifty. Is not that I am proud of that, I just had to say it because it explains why my bike was almost stolen later.
I was aware that my friend´s film was the first from the list of yesterday´s noon, he´s very organized and I remember thinking "well..we all know that this kind of things start after the schedule says", but it didn´t, so the second short movie was on when I got there.
An advice: never watch a movie or whatever it is in the dark halls of the cinema (from where you enter the room) because it´s, indeed, completly dark, and people who enters late like you, bomps in to you saying "sorry compadre", and keep walking whitout knowing that seven more people is siting in the invisible floor, and that he´s gonna need a "sorry" for all of them.
At least could saw the other three films. They last between five and fiveteen minutes. It´s dificult to make yourself an opinion of what is better or worst (because that´s what we have to do) butt I before doing...
Today I´ll talk about my experience in 2010 sanfic, it isn´t much, actually is not even close to an overview of the event, but what can I do?, thats all what I got.
Sanfic, for what I know, it´s an audiovisual festival that gathers diferent kind of directors from Chile and some foreing to. The idea is to create an instance where chilean artist can show their work and, ofcourse, recive the attention of nacional and international public and critics.
I went there, yesterday, at Hoyts cinema in La Reina, because a friend of my was going to show his short film. It started at two thirty p.m. and I was finishing my breakfast at two fifty. Is not that I am proud of that, I just had to say it because it explains why my bike was almost stolen later.
I was aware that my friend´s film was the first from the list of yesterday´s noon, he´s very organized and I remember thinking "well..we all know that this kind of things start after the schedule says", but it didn´t, so the second short movie was on when I got there.
An advice: never watch a movie or whatever it is in the dark halls of the cinema (from where you enter the room) because it´s, indeed, completly dark, and people who enters late like you, bomps in to you saying "sorry compadre", and keep walking whitout knowing that seven more people is siting in the invisible floor, and that he´s gonna need a "sorry" for all of them.
At least could saw the other three films. They last between five and fiveteen minutes. It´s dificult to make yourself an opinion of what is better or worst (because that´s what we have to do) butt I before doing...
viernes, 13 de agosto de 2010
We all now that education is a subject that has managed to
call the atention of a large number of social groups. It has
been the center of many of the politic discutions, and our university
is not an exception of a context where the problems related to it
have found a politic pronunciation.
The problem is that the question for how educational sistem must be constructed,
is often mixed whit old discutions about things that goes beyond the choices estrictly related whit education, and our university is, again, not an exception of
an institution - and here I mean the revolucionary students institution - that will always work whit problems from a point of view that hasn´t change since the traditional left revolucionary ideology stablish as the politic and aesthetic rule.
(incomplete)
call the atention of a large number of social groups. It has
been the center of many of the politic discutions, and our university
is not an exception of a context where the problems related to it
have found a politic pronunciation.
The problem is that the question for how educational sistem must be constructed,
is often mixed whit old discutions about things that goes beyond the choices estrictly related whit education, and our university is, again, not an exception of
an institution - and here I mean the revolucionary students institution - that will always work whit problems from a point of view that hasn´t change since the traditional left revolucionary ideology stablish as the politic and aesthetic rule.
(incomplete)
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)