My tendency to accept the course material in high school was definitely higher than in college so far. In high school, my peers and I were presented with information and apathetically accepted the material as the truth. Whoever argued against the teacher's lectures or even formed any kind of opinion towards the material were viewed with bitterness. I realized that in college, students develop and enhance their abilities and interests in various fields of knowledge and form individual opinions. In a way, authoritative knowledge is less influential and communal acquisition of knowledge becomes more prominent in the transition from high school to college.
In my English Literature and Composition class, I had to interpret and share my thoughts, in essay form, on a work of literature discussed in class. Although the objective of the assignment was to expand our ability to effectively interpret literature, I was limited in how I could interpret the information. There was strictly a right and a wrong answer. By authority, my teacher was able to say what interpretations were accurate and what answers were completely inappropriate. The students were marked down in their essay grade if the presented opinions diverged from his viewpoint. However, I still believe that my teacher's interpretation of the literature represents just one opinion out of an accumulation of variegated opinions and discussions . On the same note, it is believed that online blog entries, forums, and discussion panels on a subject are not reliable resources. This may be true, but they provide additions to a basic understanding of information and ideas that cannot be supported by factual statistics alone. Authoritative knowledge illustrates too narrow and restricting points of view, and collaborative discussions do not provide fully accurate results. Therefore, neither an authoritative nor communal acquisition are most useful in obtaining knowledge, but a delicate balance between the two can provide a greater understandings and quench for knowledge beyond one's own potential.
I agree that balance is key when it comes to learning. Caveats detract from both methods individually; as you said, authority mandates a certain opinion, and communal knowledge may be flawed. However, I postulate that both methods are plagued by each others' flaws. For example, when acquiring knowledge in a group, a single person could control the direction of the learning process. When acquiring knowledge from an authority, the authority may easily be wrong. Would you agree?
ReplyDeleteI've actually encountered the same thing in my AP English class in high school. When we were asked to analyze the literature and form our own thoughts about the metaphors, symbolism, and allegories in the readings, it seemed that there were only a few correct answers. However, there could just as well be a multitude of incorrect answers during the discussions. How do you propose keeping a check on them? Should we ask everyone participating in the academic discourse to cite evidence to validate their points? Moreover, how does being more educated give someone an advantage in a discussion? This also brings up another point about what to do if someone is not well immersed in the topic being discussed.
ReplyDeleteFrom the Grove: Authoritative knowledge would include expertise in the subject area, and people would most likely rely on and expert's knowledge over an individualized opinion. I agree that the authority could be wrong, and because the common public pay more attention to the experienced experts, attaining accurate knowledge can be hindered in this way.
ReplyDeleteDivG123: In my opinion, citing evidence would be the best way to support the arguments, and the more sources, the stronger an argument. Also, being educated definitely offers advantages in a discussion because people are more inclined to listen to the perspective of an expert. It shows that expertise plays a vital role in the direction of critically reasoned discussions.