In our short story, "The Lady With the Dog," Gurov is leading two different lives. In class we discussed some reasons why that Gurov stayed with both his wife and Anna. We discussed the possibility of Gurov wanting some excitement in his life. We talked about him maybe wanting to prove to his wife that he was still in charge and still the man of the house. Also, we talked about the idea of Gurov staying because he had children. Gurov knew it wasn't right for children to have to grow up without a parent. This possibility spoke volumes to me because of my own personal experience.
In my case, one of the reasons my mom stayed is because of my little brother and I. Our story is a tiny bit different than Gurov's because we had to leave.
My dad abused a lot of things (such as drugs and alcohol). My brother and I were still in elementary school and middle school throughout this time. My mom knew my brother and I needed a dad. So we stayed in the situation. There were a few other reasons my mom stayed (one was knowing that the bible says divorce is not a good thing, but I know God does not intend for people to stay in a really bad and hurtful situation), but an important reason was my mom wanted her kids to grow up having a dad. Though he was not a good one, my mom kept hoping he would change.
After much praying and a couple years down the road my mom got us out of that situation. My mom and dad were divorced.
Today it is just my mom, my brother, and I. God truly has blessed our lives and He is always been good to us. Even if we had some pretty rough situations, God always kept us safe.
In Gurov's day divorce was frowned upon and it still is today in some cases. Gurov might have stayed for the children just like my mom did. The important thing is she made a decision. Gurov did not make a decision and probably didn't until it was too late. Even still today people have many reasons why they stay together but I would definitely say that having children is a big factor. I would encourage Gurov to stay with his children from my perspective. I would encourage anyone to try to make things work out and not make divorce an option, if you can help it.
I found "The Lady With the Dog" true to life and I wanted to share my thought with you guys :)
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Friday, March 25, 2011
Process Over Product ( "Luck")
Did Scoresby really get tested on his knowledge or just what he could remember to write down at that moment in time?
Thank goodness he could remember right? Isn't that also our struggle? When we take a test we study and try to remember that information to be able to physically write it down. When we were reading "Luck", I had a thought. It sparked in my memory when Mrs. Watson was talking about tests and what they really show. Now I know that tests are just a part of being in school and they are a necessity. But what if we were tested on the process and not the product? What if we were tested not on how much information we could remember to write down but how we applied this knowledge and used it throughout the semester?What if we were tested on how well we applied the short stories or how well we can see important things to be brought out in the story (our presentations help with this)? The process is just as important as the final product. Does anyone agree?
As all these questions were popping up in my mind, I remembered something that my chorus teacher had always told us when we were getting ready to gear up for a singing festival or a competition. The judges at these competitions are really critical of your choir. They look for small details that a normal audience would not catch. They see all the little imperfections in our final product (our performance), and they count off many points. But what they do not see is all the successes and right notes that we have hit on our way to getting there. My teacher would always say "wouldn't it be great if the judges could see how far we have come and the right things we did in our process." What he meant was that he wished the judges could give us some credit in the process and for all of the times we did get the imperfections right. But unfortunately, all the judges got and wanted to see was the final, "up to bat" product.That is just how we are tested today. The only way we could prove our knowledge as a choir was to sing it right at that particular moment in time. The only way that tests allow us to prove our knowledge is if we can write the information down at that "right now" moment in time.
What if Scoresby was tested on his process instead of the product (the test)? He might not have done so well. Dont you think? He was tested in a way that everyone is tested, but he just happened to be lucky enough to ace it.What if we could be tested on the process and not the product?
I had this thought and wanted to share it. I know that tests are a concrete way to prove knowledge, it seems, but I wanted to see what you guys thought about process over product.
Thank goodness he could remember right? Isn't that also our struggle? When we take a test we study and try to remember that information to be able to physically write it down. When we were reading "Luck", I had a thought. It sparked in my memory when Mrs. Watson was talking about tests and what they really show. Now I know that tests are just a part of being in school and they are a necessity. But what if we were tested on the process and not the product? What if we were tested not on how much information we could remember to write down but how we applied this knowledge and used it throughout the semester?What if we were tested on how well we applied the short stories or how well we can see important things to be brought out in the story (our presentations help with this)? The process is just as important as the final product. Does anyone agree?
As all these questions were popping up in my mind, I remembered something that my chorus teacher had always told us when we were getting ready to gear up for a singing festival or a competition. The judges at these competitions are really critical of your choir. They look for small details that a normal audience would not catch. They see all the little imperfections in our final product (our performance), and they count off many points. But what they do not see is all the successes and right notes that we have hit on our way to getting there. My teacher would always say "wouldn't it be great if the judges could see how far we have come and the right things we did in our process." What he meant was that he wished the judges could give us some credit in the process and for all of the times we did get the imperfections right. But unfortunately, all the judges got and wanted to see was the final, "up to bat" product.That is just how we are tested today. The only way we could prove our knowledge as a choir was to sing it right at that particular moment in time. The only way that tests allow us to prove our knowledge is if we can write the information down at that "right now" moment in time.
What if Scoresby was tested on his process instead of the product (the test)? He might not have done so well. Dont you think? He was tested in a way that everyone is tested, but he just happened to be lucky enough to ace it.What if we could be tested on the process and not the product?
I had this thought and wanted to share it. I know that tests are a concrete way to prove knowledge, it seems, but I wanted to see what you guys thought about process over product.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)