Taking a moment for beaming with pride

about the two retrospective panels we've had so far.  Each of the twelve students have returned to a previous reading and offered an interpretation that takes account of our four semesters of work together.  With only five minutes to speak they have had to be concise in expressing their insights; and they have been.  Also impressive: the coherence among them!  Evidently they have been in the same conversation over these months.  They have taken note of a cyclical movement between emphasis on individualism and revival of concern for community.  They have noticed that even linear developments often have periods of regression.  They have commented upon parallels between the experience of distinct groups.  They have observed the interaction of large scale social and political movements with the personal lives of individuals.  They have pointed to the important distinction between seeking commonality and being forced to conform.  Important, rich insights and knowledge that hints at the value of this program.

Inside Conversation

M. Cassatt, "The Conversation"

At yesterday's Admitted Student Day, in the session on the four Conversations programs, a prospective student said: "The student I stayed with last night told me that AmCon is the B-team to The Great Conversation."

My reply, "The Great Conversation does tend to promote a sort of arrogance.  In AmCon we are more interested in democracy."  Then a few more remarks about varying topics and approaches and how those are valued.  Finally, which ever program a person is in, it will take your whole brain and lots of time. Karen als spoke up to emphasize that if a student has been admitted to St. Olaf, odds are that that student could do the work in any one of these four programs.

Later I wished that I had thought to offer an analogy to music organzations.   Is being in the band more or less serious than being in orchestra or a choir?  And isn't it the case that what each choir sings is a significant factor in each one's reputation, since all three of the upper-class choirs are excellent in quality?

How we learn: what this project is for

The motivation for these blogs is to "enhance learning." We, that is Matt and I, the teachers, hope that by adapting the old practice of a commonplace book to the new technology of the blog we, that is all of us in the class, will learn. We hope that the habit of gathering up pieces of our reading and our lives and reflecting upon them will encourage us to think deeply, to make connections, to gain insight.

I also hope that the discipline of the commonplace blog will help each of us be patient with process of learning. Belden Lane, in a part of his book we are not reading, observes something like this: There are things we can not learn unless we are confused or frightened. Fear I'm not fond of and I try to keep it out of the classroom, but confusion is often an important phase of the journey.

These entries will, I hope, provide markers along the way: compass readings or landmarks. And they will allow us to return, reconsider, make new meaning where there was once confusion. Another image: Per Hansa and his family heading for Dakota, a bit lost, but adapting the trick of steering by a rope from the ocean to the prairie during the day and taking readings from the stars at night. (Photo is of St. Olaf's own restored prairie. See more at http://www.stolaf.edu/academics/naturallands/media/prairie/prairie3.jpg)

Having conversations with way is merely a variation of a principle of the American Conversations program at St. Olaf. Through the four semesters we study defining conversations about a that have taken place in our collective past, we converse with authors, artists, and other Americans, and we converse with each other.