This page was originally produced for a course given in Fall 2002. It is slightly modified here to remove some of the course specific material.
Reading Assignment: There is a reading assignment for each class period. It is the responsibility for each student to read the assignment and be prepared to perform a recitation on the assignment. The actual performance of the recitation will be by random selection.
Notetaking: It would be helpful to make a daily practice of making notes as you read the class’s assigned reading. I recommend to those students who intend to become lifelong learners that they read and fully digest the book: “How to Read A Book” by Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Van Doren (ISBN 0-671-21280-X or 0-671-21209-5 Pbk.) In particular, a student should become highly skilled in both Inspectional and Analytical Reading.
When reading the assigned reading the student is encouraged to read with the certainty of recitation in mind. There will be a recitation and discussion period in every class and each student is equally at risk to have to deliver the recitation and all are expected to participate in the discussion. Since the books assigned for this course are expository in nature, i.e. they are books intended to convey knowledge, and our task is to acquire and examine that knowledge, it is essential that we extract from the books what the author intends to convey in terms of 1) the theme or thesis, 2) the problems he/she sets out to solve, and 3) the methods by which they are solved.
One usefully begins with an Inspectional Reading (see Adler and Doren) of the assignment. This is a quick browse through the assignment seeking to answers the questions: 1) What kind of reading is it?, 2) What is it about on the whole?, and 3) what is the structural order of the work?, i.e. the pattern of development. Notes on this are termed structural – they deal with the structure and not the substance. Analytical Reading engages the substance and notes of this kind are termed conceptual. They concern the terms that the author uses and how they are applied to addressing the issues, which the author writes about. Note that since we are applying these to readings and not to the whole book as Adler and Doren do, we are operating at a narrower scope. The third kind of notes involve the shape of the discourse which involves not only how the discourse is put together, but the bones of the arguments and in more general terms, how this exposition relates to other expositions of the same general kind. Adler and Doren refer to this as Syntopical reading, i.e. reading more than one book on the same subject. Notes on the shape of the discourse they term dialectical.
Adler and Doren distinguish
five steps in Syntopical
Reading, which we will simply list here without discussion.
These steps are important when you are studying a body of knowledge.
Here we are looking at only two books directly, although we may find
other readings appropriate.
Step 1: Finding the Relevant Passages
Step 2: Bringing the Authors To Terms
Step 3: Getting the Questions Clear
Step 4: Defining the Issues, and
Step 5: Analyzing the Discussion.
The following are the rules which Adler and Doren advance for analytical reading.
Rule 1:
YOU MUST KNOW WHAT KIND OF BOOK YOU ARE READING, AND YOU SHOULD KNOW
THIS AS EARLY IN THE PROCESS AS POSSIBLE, PREFERABLY BEFORE YOU BEGIN TO READ. –
of course this is a bit simple in our case since we are going to be reading
books that are practical and expository in nature that purport to tell us how to
do programming.
Rule 2:
STATE THE UNITY OF THE WHOLE BOOK IN A SINGLE SENTENCE, OR AT MOST A
FEW SENTENCES (A SHORT PARAGRAPH). – this is the theme or propositions
which the reading is defending. Note
that you ought to substitute the term READING where Adler and Doren use BOOK
since we are applying their principles to individual readings.
Rule 3:
SET FORTH THE MAJOR PARTS OF THE BOOK, AND SHOW HOW THESE ARE
ORGANIZED INTO A WHOLE, BY BEING ORDERED TO ONE ANOTHER AND TO THE UNITY OF THE
WHOLE. – it is somewhat less difficult to pursue this since we are
dealing with READINGS of approximately 30 pages in scope.
The point however is that not only must one attend to the Unity, i.e. How
a work is ONE, but one must also attend to the Diversity, i.e. How it is MANY,
and the relationship between the two.
A Recitation is divided into three stages:
Describe what the author is saying, summarizing the major themes briefly, possibly in a set of theme sentences or brief assertions. Typically there are three aspects: a) telling what a thing is, identification or definition b) describing or enumerating its parts, composition, and c) describing or demonstrating its operation, how it works.
Interpretation involves your personal evaluation of the reading. This should involve a critical discussion which is tied to some sort of principled position (this is not about “feelings” or “preferences” as in “I liked it” or “I didn’t like it” – the interpretation explores how this reading fits into a larger picture, whether the terms used by the author are sufficiently clear, and whether they are adequately supported. This definitely involves opinion on the part of the individual, but an opinion supported by facts and principles. You are still focused on what the author is saying and how he/she says it.
This is where you more directly engage the material with agreement or disagreement with the author’s positions and development. Engagement is focused on agreement or disagreement with the author. One either makes similar ontological commitments to those the author makes or one doesn’t. If the position is that one has disagreements with the author, these need to be identified and supported. Take a position. Is the author clear or unclear? Do you agree or disagree with the author? Is the author’s position strong enough, or is it in need of bolstering? What do you think? Why do you think it?
After the engagement the recitation should transition to classroom discussion. The person doing the recitation should moderate the discussion. A simple open ended throw up question is: “What do you think?” The spirit of the discussion should be one of exploration and enquiry. This is not a debate where there is a winner and loser. It is instead an exploration of the significance of ideas. Another universally good question is: How do you know that is the case? If you don’t know, how could you demonstrate it?
Recitations will be graded and the grade will be sent to the student by e-mail. The grading will be subjective on the part of the teacher and will be one of the following:
The components considered will be: 1) Adherence to the assigned form, 2) Preparation, 3) Clarity, Completeness and Correctness, 4) Poise, 5) Delivery, and 6) Handling of the Discussion.