I loved that the message board was a requirement. In my experience, online discussion boards don't seem to work unless they are a part of the students' grade. These were almost never a requirement in my graduate classes, which I find surprising because they give students an opportunity to reflect on the reading before and after class discussions. It was interesting to read other people's posts. It was also interesting to examine the trending topics. Certain books had over 20 posts. This was useful because it indicates the even some of my least favorite texts were more controversial, thought-provoking, and message board-inducing. Crank was an example of a novel that I didn't initially love but that received a lot of posts. For this reason alone, I might teach it. The sheer number of posts on the message board made me realize that people had a lot to say about this book. But the posts also got me thinking. Perhaps it's the case that the online forum gets people talking in a way they wouldn't face-to-face.
I also think the message board helps people prepare for class. It also provides a forum for communication after the class discussion, which is often when we change our perspectives or begin to have a more complex understanding of a novel. It's a tool I'd definitely like to use in my future teaching, though I think giving guidelines for online etiquette is imperative.
These are a couple of my posts:
Graphic novels and catastrophe
One thing I have noticed about graphic novels is that the ones that actually make it into the classroom are those that deal with very serious content. American Born Chinese may be an exception (race and culture are serious topics but may not be as bleak as genocide).
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Maus and Persepolis. I think they are valuable texts. I think they should definitely be taught in the classroom, and I have had good experiences teaching them both. For me, there is no question about whether or not they should be considered "literature."
I just wonder why instructors often discount graphic novels that don't necessarily cover catastrophic events. Is it because graphic novels aren't yet in the canon? Is it because "cartoons" (like fantasy) are considered fun and therefore must have really serious content to become a part of what we study in the classroom?
Does anyone know of other graphic novels that are starting to make their way into the classroom?
Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian: Function of the images in the novel
I agree with Ashleigh that this novel is wonderfully written, funny, and still very accessible for teens. The voice is so unique, authentic, and totally unpretentious.
I wonder what other people thought about the function of the visual additions to the text. I am personally obsessed with the use of images (photographs, graphics, etc.) in literature, so I was excited to see Junior's cartoons in the novel. Arnold/Junior comments on his drawings very early on:
"I draw because words are too unpredictable. I draw because words are too limited. If you speak and write in English, or Spanish, or Chinese, or any other language, then only a certain percentage of human beings will get your meaning.
But when you draw a picture, everybody can understand it."
I wonder how other people thought the drawings supplemented the written words. I at first assumed that Alexie himself drew them but quickly realized they were done by another artist. I did a bit of research to see if he draws as well. I read the bio on Alexie's website. Although much of the novel is taken right from his personal experience, I couldn't find any information on his experience with visual art. Junior draws as a way to express himself, and though Junior seems based on Alexie, Alexie is an author & poet, not a visual artist. Why did he decide to create a protagonist who draws rather than one who writes poetry, for example? Why did he include images in the novel, and what do the images add to the novel?
