Course Name: First-Year Seminar 101-19: Strange Texts
Faculty: Charles O'Keefe, Professor of French
Librarian: Mary Prophet, Deputy Director, Denison University Library
With the help and participation of Mary Prophet (Deputy Director, Denison University Library), I propose to offer a first-year college writing course that will raise explicitly four questions at the heart of informational literacy and indeed at the heart of a liberal education:
The proposed course "First-Year Seminar 101-19: Strange Texts" has the students read, discuss, and write about five classics of world literature: The Epic of Gilgamesh, the Lais of Marie de France, The Sufferings of Young Werther, The Stranger, and The Woman Warrior. The primary goal of this as of all of Denison's first-year 101 seminars is to help students improve their writing. I assume, however, that to write well, one must read well, and to read well, one must think well. But much of what one often thinks, reads, and writes about can of course be called information. In my class, then, I would like the students to learn to write, read, and think well by starting a life-long consideration of the nature of information, of appropriate ways to gather it, and of the best ways to use it.
Not coincidentally, for this literature course I have chosen books that either directly or indirectly raise the question of the nature of literary information. For instance, the class's first assignment will be to read the Sumerian epic Gilgamesh. After the students have read and feel comfortable with "the" story, I will have them explore the implications of the fact that "the" story is not only a translation, it is also a composite translation by a scholar not expert in ancient Middle Eastern languages, a composite consisting of others' translations of fragmented texts produced in different periods and in different cultures. I will ask the students to consider what "the" story could mean under those circumstances. After a consideration of those presumably external factors, I will then have them discuss the internal significance of the opening fragment from Gilgamesh where the narrator explains that he is relaying (how well?) the story from an inscription left by Gilgamesh himself. From an internal perspective too, then, the same question arises: what is "the" story? My hope is to encourage the students in the habit of wondering to what extent that and similar questions apply to all information. So what, for instance, is "the" story, that is, "the" version of Hamlet and to what extent can we know? Beyond literature, what for instance is "the" story of the Sumerian rise to power or "the" story of Middle Eastern contributions to world culture, and to what extent can we know?
While I am trying in my classes to sensitize my students to some of these more philosophical issues involving information, Mary Prophet will start educating the students in the more practical ways of gathering and evaluating information for a 5-10 page term paper. After the students have written for me a preliminary description of the topics that they choose for their Gilgamesh papers, Mary will read the descriptions. She will then offer in the library a class on research resources, during which she can sketch for students efficient ways for familiarizing oneself with the general background of various kinds of topics and for narrowing topics down to feasible dimensions. She will also point out the general problems posed by the number and variety of research tools, as they relate to the proposed topics. For example: where does a student go to find out what information is available regarding the possible impact of Gilgamesh on the Homeric epics or regarding the possible propaganda use that Saddam Hussein has made of Gilgamesh?; if the information is in a book, how can we tell how reliable the book is, or if the information is on line, how can we evaluate the source? She will, in short, start the process of educating them to become savvy patrons of today's increasingly powerful but daunting research resources.
The next, more focussed step will follow hard on the heels of the general class on research resources. I will cluster the students in groups (ideally of three) according to the similarities among their topics, so that Mary can meet with each group in the library to help them address typical questions e.g., in light of the individual student's academic situation, how broad/narrow should that individual's topic be for a five-page research paper?; given each student's situation and topic, what individual schedules have to be followed for interlibrary-loan material to be evaluated properly and for new leads to be followed up?; where do the demands created by the FYS 101 schedule fit into the schedule of writing and testing demands created by each student's other courses?
Clarifying the answers to these questions will take on special urgency for the students because I create extra pressure on their immediate need to create and keep an efficient schedule. That extra pressure results from my requiring students in each group also to produce common products for a common grade: each student has to read, edit, and comment on the rough drafts and final papers of the other students in the group, after which one of the students will be required to write a common introduction, another will be required to write a common conclusion, and a third the common bibliography. Naturally, the introduction, conclusion, and bibliography too will require common editing and proofing, which in turn will call for careful scheduling.
I impose that requirement of common products because I believe it essential for students to learn several things from each other: without exception, everyone (not just the weaker students) has need of and benefits from editors; everyone (not just the stronger students) can become more sensitive to problems of writing organization and clarity when one sees-as the students will see-those problems in papers by others; and all groups-in which educated people have to learn to work-must expect and be prepared to solve perceived and real problems of uneven contributions to collective undertakings. To advance those goals, I will require students to email regularly to me for grading their logs of both individual and collective research and writing. The students will email their logs to Mary too, so that she and I can consult on what advice to give each student/group. The logs should also help us to spot the difficulties that will arise for individual students from the inevitable evolution of research, and to suggest tactics for dealing with the difficulties. At Mary's recommendation, I will discuss in class common issues brought to light by a reading of the logs, so that, among other things, I can pass on to students tips from my own research experiences.
As Mary pointed out to me during our discussions of the course and proposal, I am in effect asking the student groups to produce a small book. So at Mary's suggestion, I will raise with the students the possibility of having their finished products (introduction, three chapters, conclusion, and bibliography) bound. At the very least and most concretely, it would educate them about what goes into the physical creation of a book. Ideally and more abstractly, it will alert them to important truths about books, in other words and ultimately, truths about information. For instance, notwithstanding the impression of authority created by a book, like their "book" any book is always the product of less than omniscient choices; like their "book" solidly researched and well written books can nonetheless be identified; like their book any good book is an education for the writer as well as for the reader precisely because of informed research techniques; and like their book if it is well done, such books deserve, on the one hand, respect because of what they can teach readers, and on the other critical evaluation because their "facts," their "information" are not absolutes but rather points of further discussion by educated people. Another possible merit in having the students' papers bound is increased motivation: if what they write will "appear in print" for others to see, students may well be inclined to work just that little bit harder, to do just that little bit extra that will separate "good" from "excellent."
Finally, Mary and I will have a session with the students to have them evaluate the entire research experience from their perspective. We will ask them to indicate the various strengths and weakness of the whole exercise, and to offer suggestions for improvement. We will also ask them whether, as a result of the exercise, they feel more comfortable dealing with the four information-literacy questions posed at the beginning of the course. She and I will then use the findings as appropriate to fine-tune the procedures to be followed for the second term paper (on Werther). At the end of the semester, we will ask the students to evaluate the second exercise. After I have submitted the final grades, Mary and I will revisit the course as a whole, so that we can decide what form it should take in the future.