Sorry this is so late.
Last group meeting, Stephanie and Don reviewed their meeting and told Ting and Shiori what "Summary and Sayback" was. Then we went on to the Protocol.
Each of us though for a while and came up with our questions for our group.
Ting's challenge was to create a realistic dialog. Her question for the group was whether a "realistic" dialog could be interesting, and if her piece seemed to be progressing to slowly.
The rest of the group responded that a dialog that is "realistic" can be interesting, as long as something is happening. We agreed that Ting's piece would be slow, if it continued at its current pace, but we suggested varying the pace...
Stephanie's challenge was to write an analytical response to the piece we read several meetings ago, "Black English." She was wondering whether she was allowed to be as opinionated as she was. The group's response was that for that adding more support and evidence would "let" her be opinionated.
Shiori's challenge was to write lyrics to songs through a stream-of-conscience method. He was wondering whether anyone picked up on any cohesive ideas or themes in either of the songs. The group agreed positively, but said they wanted to hear the songs.
Don's challenge was to write about extremely complex, abstract concepts and connect them to more concrete, literal examples. He was wondering if he was successful in doing so. The group agreed that it was an extremely difficult challenge and that the piece has the content to be successful. We suggested organizing and building on the ideas he already has. We also noticed that his piece is one HUGE paragraph. It could help to break it up.
Shiori, so what does it feel like to write about yourself in the 3rd person? :) You wrote a thorough response - one that gives me a nice "snapshot" of your work together. I wonder what your group thought of the question-crafting and responding process itself. Useful?
ReplyDelete