ubertuber

roachboy -

I am not hosting or attempting to provoke a debate. I am hosting a VIEWING of the presidential debate on 10/8 (actually all of them, but this is the week I am talking about specifically), hopefully with a deconstruction and analysis afterwards. I apologize if I was unclear about this point in my earlier posts. I merely feel that the debate we watch should provide enough material for discussion for one session - otherwise we will be having an all-out political debate instead of a discussion about THE debate. The goal here is not to convince anyone of one party's superiority, but rather to be able to deconstruct what we can and can not learn directly from the candidates - in other words, to begin to learn a skill that will serve our students beyond this particular night or election. This is why, upon reflection, I am hesitant to cloud the water with partisan material from either side. We can view this material on other nights. 10/8 should be about the candidates themselves and the discussion they engage in.

Also, respectfully, I know the difference between ignorance and disagreement. Hardly anyone here (or anywhere for that matter) agrees with me a majority of the time. I don't expect that, nor does it concern me. What concerns me is students that form opinions only by hearsay or by learning from political idealogues/demagogues such as Limbaugh, Hannity, or Moore. By hosting a live group analysis and deconstruction of a debate that we will have watched together we are hoping to encourage a more self-sufficient method for our students to come to their opinions, even if those opinions are exactly the same as before. This critical thinking, and ultimately the ability to express views that comes along with it, is part of teaching artists to be whole individuals who can bridge the gap to mainstream society to advocate for themselves and for their art.

__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam