DOCUMENT RESUME CS 209 525 - Ed

2y ago
11 Views
2 Downloads
1.51 MB
102 Pages
Last View : 22d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Wade Mabry
Transcription

DOCUMENT RESUMEED 266 460AUTHORTITLEINSTITUTIONPUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROMPUB TYPEJOURNAL CITEDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORSIDENTIFIERSCS 209 525Davis, Ken, Ed.The Responding Reader: Nine New Approaches toTeaching Literature.Kentucky Council of Teachers of English.82102p.National Council of Teachers of English, 1111 KenyonRd., Urbana, IL 61801 (Stock No. 40858, 3.50 member, 4.00 nonmember).Collected Works - Serials (022) -- Guides - ClassroomUse - Guides (For Teachers) (052)Kentucky English' Bulletin; v32 nl Fall 1982MF01/PC05 Plus Postage.Critical Reading; Higher Education; Inservice TeacherEducation; Literary Criticism; *LiteratureAppreciation; Poetry; *Reader Response; *Reader TextRelationship; Secondary Education; *TeachingMethods*Affective Response; Burke (Kenneth)ABSTRACTArticles in this journal issue explore therelationship between the reader and the literature text, and discussways that instruction can enhance reader response to that literature.Following an introduction summarizing the nine articles, the titlesand their authors are as follows: (1) "It Is the Poem That I Remake:Using Kenneth Burke's Pentad to Help Students Writing about RobertFrost's 'Mending Wall'" (Joseph Comprone); (2) "How Did You Like It?The Question of Student Response and Literature" (Charles R. Duke);(3) "Eliciting Response to Literature" (Joan W. Graham and Robert E.Probst); (4) "A Reader-Response Approach to the Teaching ofLiterature" (Sandra Harris); (5) "Enhancing Response to Literature:An Inservice Approach" (Susan S. Kissel and Peter M. Schiff); (6)"From Response to Analysis: Strategies for Involving Students inThinking about Literature" (Kathleen W. Lampert); (7) "Responding toLiterature from Within: The Untold Story Game" (Gary M. Salvner); (8)"Clustering for Reader Response to Creative Writing" (PatriciaSchatteman); acid (9) "The Writer, the Reader, the Poem: An InquiryApproach to Poetry" (Denny T. Wolfe, Jr.). **I*************************Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made**from the original ******************************

ER/angLT,oc,1 ging,'fisoh.1)C:3LLJ"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BYU.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATIONKen DavisEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC/tC.Th document has been reproduced asTO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)."received from the person or orgarutahonongstating it0 Moor changes have been made to improvereproduction qualitySpecial IssuePoints of view or opinions stated in the document do not necessanty represent officol NIEpositron or policyTHE RESPONDING READERNine New Approachesto Teaching LiteratureVolume 32Fall 1982Number 1Published by the Kentucky Council of Teachers of English%)s2

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINVolume 32Introduction:Fall 1982Number 1The Responding Reader3It Is the Poem That I Remake: Using Kenneth Burke'sPentad to Help Students Write about RobertFrost's "Wending Wall"Joseph Comprone5How Did You Like It? The Question cf StudentResponse and LiteratureCharles R. Duke19Eliciting Response to LiteratureJoan W. Graham and Robert E. Probst30A Reader-Response Approach to the Teachingof LiteratureSandra Harris47Enhancing Response to Literature: An InserviceApproachSusan S. Kissel and Peter H. Schiff59From Response to Analysis: Strategies forInvolvin!, Students in Thinking aboutLiteratureKathleen W. Lampert66Responding to Literature from Within:Untold Story GameGary K. Salvner77TheClustering for Reader Response to Creative WritingPatricia L. Schatteman88The Writer, the Reader, the Poem:Approach to PoetryDenny T. Wolfe, Jr.93An Inquiry3

EDITOR:Ken Davis, University of KentuckyASSOCIATE EDITOR: Fran Helphinstine, Morehead State UniversityASSISTANT EDITORS: Terry McNealy, Northern Kentucky UniversityBrenda Gentry Brown, Berea Ccmmunity SchoolContributions are invited and should be submitted to Ken Davis,Department of English, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY40506. All contributions should follow MLA style, as well asthe NCTE Guidelines for Nonsexist Use of Language.The Kentucky English Bulletin is published by the KentuckyCouncil of Teachers of English, with the cooperation andassistance of the Department of English, College of Arts andSciences, University of Kentucky. Subscription is includedin KCTE membership dues ( 6), which should be sent to CarolLockhart, Department of English, Western Kentucky University,Bowling Green, KY 42101.The Kentucky English Bulletin is a member of the NCTEInformation Exchange Agreement.KCTE EXECUTIVE BOARDPRESIDENT: S. Patricia Rae McNamara, St. Catherine CollegePAST PRESIDENT: Charles Duke, Murray State UniversityVICE PRESIDENT: Gretchen Niva, Western Kentucky UniversitySECRETARY: Patti Slagle, Iroquois High School, LouisvilleTREASURER: Carol Lockhart, Western Kentucky UniversityNCTE LIAISON OFFICER: Marjorie Kaiser, University of LuJisvilleVICE PRESIDENT, COLLEGES: Peter Schiff, Northern KentuckyUniversityVICE PRESIDENT, SKCONDAHY SCHOOLS: Linda Johnson, HighlandsHigh School, Fort ThomasVICE PRESIDENT, ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS: Betty McAuliffe, St. AgnesGrade School, LouisvilleEXECUTIVE SECRETARY: Alfred L. Crabb, Jr., University of.Kentucky

INTRODUCTION:THE RESPONDING READERIn his article for this issue, Gary Salvner writes, "Theoldest new word in literature pedagogy is 'response.'" It'strue. Concern for the student's own response to literature isan old theme, but one on which English teachers at all levelsare working new and exciting variations. As evidence, I submitthis issue of the Kentucky English Bulletin on "The RespondingReader."The eleven authors of these nine articles make up a faircross-section of ,cur profession. The six Kentuckians arejoined by five out -of- staters, and the seven university facultyshare these pages with four high-school teachers, members of agroup too little heard from in professional publications.Welcome to all.I've struggled with ways of grouping these articles, butmy efforts have been confounded by the mix, in almost everyarticle, of theory, pedagogy, and applications to specificworks. So the alphabet will have to do.Joe Comprone, therefore, leads off by providing a usefuland generalizable map for guiding students through a Frostpoem; Joe's notes alone are worth the price of this issue,constituting an almost defmlitive bibliography on readerresponse criticism. CharlLe Duke surveys the field from hisown humane perspective and opens fresh, uurprising windowsinto the minds of student readers.Georgians Joan Graham and Bob Probst offer valuable historical perspective, then provide detailed, specific teachingtechniques; I plan to try some of them right away. Sandra35

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINHarris gives a concise introduction to reader-response methods,then illustrates with her own materials for teaching of Of Niceand Men; if you want to know what the reader-response approachis all about, this may be the article to start with.Susan Kissel and Peter Schiff generously summarize theirNEH workshop for those of us not lucky enough to attend, andMassachusetts high-school teacher Kathleen Lampert takes usthrough a wonderful, workable unit on narrative fiction. GarySnlvner next shares his "Untold Story Game," a ready- t,-copyand ready-to-use classroom simulation; I know Gary willappreciate receiving copies of the "front pages" that resultfrom this activity.Patricia Schatteman describes her use of the inventiontechnique called "clustering" as a tool for focusing herstudents' response to literature; I'm confident that you'llfind immediate use for it. Finally, Denny Wolfe turns responding readers into responding writers in en exciting unitin which students both write and read poems.Again, thanks to the authors whose work appears herein;they could have published it anywhere, so I'm grateful thatthey chose thz Kentucky English Bulletin.Articles are still sought, on any aspect of the teachingof English, for the Winter 1982 issue; deadline is November 1.As always, the Spring 1983 issue will feature the winners ofthe KCTE Student Writing Contest. The Fall 1983 issue willbe on "The Computerized English Class"; submissions will bewelcone until August 1, 1983.Ken Davis64

IT IS THE POEM THAT I REMAKE:USINGKENNETH BURKE'S PENTAD TO HELPSTUDENTS WRITE ABOUT ROBERT FROST'S"MENDING WALL"Joseph Comprone, University of LouisvilleIBackground TheoryRecent literary theory has begun to re-focus our attentionas teachers. Structuralists and reader - response critics encourage teachers to make the "act" of reading the centralconcern in our teaching, just as 'vary educational theorists inthe 20th century have encouraged teachers to move from a facuaon subject to a focus on students as they learn.' What typesof questions might teachers who wish to attend to the actualreading process rather than to the end result--the message orfinal meaning--ask themselves as they p epare to teach amodern poem, in this came, Robert Frost's "Mending Wall"? Canthese questions be used to develop a Methodology that might betranaferred from one piece of literature to another, from onecourse to another, from one group of students to anotherwithout sacrificing the teaching of critical reading skills?This essay will develop a strategy, based on reader-responsecriticism and Kenneth Burke's pentad, that teachers can applyto any literary work. The strategy will help studentsparticipate in a work's dramatic context, will help themdiscover meaning as they read, and will assure that theircritical essays are based on an appreciation of the internalstructures of a literary work.IIBurke's PentadKenneth Burke, in several seminal works, has developed acritical strategy that might well become a literature teacher's5

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINmost effective means of analyzing a complex literary workbefore using it to teach students how to read a literary work.2In outline, Burke's pentad is a simple concept It suggeststhat every communication process is dramatic, that in every actof communication there is an agent who acts through language,there is an agency, which enables the agent to act, there is ascene or background against which the verbal action is taken,.there is an action that can be abstracted from the overallsituation and represented as an event, and there is a purpose,which guides the developing verbal action from beginning to end.Often these five elements, universal to every verbal situation,have been reduced to the more familiar journalistic questions- who, what, when, where, and why.3 Such reductions, however,are not capable of helping teachers introduce students to thecomplex process of responding to literature simply because theyfail to account for the more complex rhetorical contexts thatare found in a literary work.Literature, as James Moffett has argued in Teaching theUniverse of Discourse, is the most symbolic and abstract formof discourse that any culture can produce.4 When we readliterature we are interpreting concrete, dramatic experiencein abstract, symbolic terms. Denmark becomes a highlyabstracted symbol of corruption in Haslet; Hartford,Connecticut become a highly abstracted symbol of Americanmaterialism in Connecticut Yankee; Ahab's quest for the whalebecomes a highly abstracted, almost emblematic symbol of humanambition and pride in a neutral or malevolent universe in KobeDick. This move from concrete referent to abstract,dramaticinterpretive context seems natural enough to most experiencedreaders of literature, English teachers included. But it ismost certainly a learned skills something that beginners mustbe taught, II we wish, as teachers, to expe:la our students'experiential and conceptual backgrounis as they read.Rhetorical critioism would explain literature's deceptivelyabstract nature from a different perspective than Moffett's.Any work of literature has, in essence, two rhetorical triadswithin its context: the first constructed from the speaker,subject, audience context in the work itself; the second constructed from the interaction of implied author, impliedreader, and implied or "real" subject,On the first level, forexample, "Mending Wall" is a poem told by a New England farmer,addressed by imolication to a reader who assumes interest inthe life represent-P.: :- the poem (the rituals and functions offarming in New :ngland), and concerning the particularactivity of wall-mending. The interaction of dramatic components of speaker, subject, and audience are indeed complex68

KINTUCKY RHOLISH BULLKTINon this level, but the reader of the poem can at least focusdirectly on dialogue, image, and action without worrying aboutambiguities and ironies that evolve when focus is switched tothe implied author's intention.The second level of rhetorical interpretation is broughtIn once we consider what Robert Frostpastoral and regionalpoet, master of dramatic irony- -means to tell us through hisrendering of the drama in this poem. Do we suppose an authorwho aligns himself with narrator, an enlightened spokespersonfor progressive ehariug of private property? Or do we searchout a covert respect for the old stone savage, armed withfences against the "advances," the more communal thinking ofthe narrator? Does the assumed author find nature benign,neutral, or malevolent? Questions such as these could be askedof implied subject and readers as well. Mien readers ask thesetypes of questions they are superimposing the more complex,implied rhetorical context of author, reader, and subject uponthe simpler narrative-dramatic context within the poem itself.IIIApplication of the Pentad to "Wending Wall"How, then, can the pentad be applied to literary works byteachers who wish to introduce students to the complex interaction between the surface and implied contexts of a literarywork? The answer is simple enough, in theory. Teachers, must,first, analyze the work in order to find which of the fiveelements are most important and to pinpoint where each dominates the act of reading the poem. The following is the resultof my application of the pentad to Robert Frost's "MendingWall." Particularly in a complex work, keep in mind that twoor more elements of the pentad may well operate at simultaneoustextual moments. Also, it is important to remember that areader ar.lves at a fuller understanding of dramatic context byconsidering the relationships (Burke calls them "ratios") amongthe elements of the pentad.Tho first twenty-seven lines of the poem serve two dramaticfunctions: they establish the scene for the symbolic actionthat will followwall-mending; they define the agents--theactors--who will act in the rest of the poem.To understandthe intricacies of symbolic action in this poem, however, wemust examine these two elements--scene and agent--in moredetail. Frost, in all his work, posits a rugged natural world,often bereft of human inhabitants, certainly incapable ofpathetic ranee), and representing isolated, lonely humanbeings.5 Human action, in Frost, is usually seen against the7

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINbackdrop of nature's rugged insensitivity. A close look atlines 1-27, with this broader understanding in mind, reveals acomplication in the process of defining central agents for thepoem. The poem's narrator is, at first, apparently sole agent:he tells us about the wall; he tells us about what happens tothe wall; he and his neighbors have found the "gams" in thewall: he notifies his neighbor and instigates the 1:1A11-mending;he describes how he and his neighbor mend the wall; indeed, heis also the one who reduces this work to game and Newbyantagonizing his neighbor and by reminding him of the uselessness of wall-mending. But a subterranean agent also actsthrough these twenty-seven lines--the "something" that destroysthe wall, the human artifact ritualistically reconstructedevery spring. It sometimes takes the form of "frozen-groundswells," sometimes the form of hunters, sometimes the form ofmagic as it cause the stones to fall even as the neighborsmend. This opposition of human and natural agents creates aplayful, agonistic context for the :.ntire poem. We are watchinga primal human game in which men work together to impose orderon a potentially chaotic world. In fact, the culminating lineof this first section explicitly labels wall-building "anotherkind of outdoor game."6Scene also operates in two ways in these first twentyseven lines. Lines 1-11 establish background for the actionof wall-mending that will take place more specifically laterin the poem: we see the New England terrain symbolized in"frozen-ground-swells" and "boulders in the sun"; we know thebackground of ritualized, seasonal behavior the hunters, the"yelping dogs," the yearly evolution of "spring mending- time "that will serve as context for the wall-mending that takesplace later. In lines 12-27, we are given the scenic foreground for the game: the narrator's ritual of notifying hisneighbor; their ritual of line-walking; their "spelling" of theloaf-stones that fall from assigned places. These later cometo function as the game's rules.Lines 1-27 of the poem, then, create a complex interrelationship of scene and agent. Ernerienced readers pick up allor at least some of this subconsciously. They, in a sense,feel the context that must be underntood if the rest of thepoem is to mean in a significant way. As teachers, then, itbecomes our job to help students build this context, excuse thepun, from the "ground-swell" up. It is exactly at mils pointthat I can clarify how Burke's pentad can help beginningreaders. The eleme,ts of agent and scene become, with a firstreading of lines 1-27 behind us, a means of shaping discussionand writing questions that will bring the subconscic Is bulk ofthe iceberg of literary context to the tip or surface of thebeginning reader's attention.B10

KENTUCKY 1111014"9 !ff!.FETINIVA Burkean Heuristic for Discoveringthe Dramatic Clmtext of "Mending Wall"Secondary and college readers would certainly be able tofollow the surface language and narrative action of "MendingWall." The diction and syntax are common enough, and theimagery is familiar or, at leant, easily compared with thestudent's asperiences with rural life. Students would, however,need the teacher's help in coming to understand how the poem'slanguage and structure take action against the reader, howthext elements lead the reader toward and away from differentperspectives on the poem's meaning.7 Here is a set ofdirections, response - questions, and writing exercises that willhelp teachers bring students to an understanding of reading asan active process in which meaning evolves from give and takeamong perspectives.I.Backgrounds The teacher should pose questions aboutthe title. Students might be asked to write a paragraphexplaining what they think the poem will be about afterreading only the title and discussing its implications.Does this sound like a poem about work? What are areader's expectations when that question is answeredaffirmatively?2.Before students read lines 1-12 of the poem theyehould be asked to look for two agents in competitionwith one another. The agents do not have to be human.After the twelve lines have been read, students shouldwrite two paragraphs describing the agents in the poem.Students should go back and gather evidence from thetext to help make their definitions of agents clearer.3.Students should read lines 12-27 with the idea oflooking for a definition of setting or scene in the poem.After completing this reading, they should *rite aparagraph in which they generalize a definition of thescene in the poem, followed by a specific list of sensoryelements, taken from the poem, that support the generalization. This is probably the time for a brief discussionof denotation and connotation, abstract and concrete,image and symbol, also drawing from words and images inthe poem.4.At this point, teachers should use terministic screensand perspectives by incongruity, two Burkean concepts, toshape a writing exercise that will ask students to lookback, using their remarks on scene and agent, and forward911.

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETIN(a "perspective by incongruity") to the rest of the poem.8When they play this Janus- headed critical role, lookingbackward and forward in the poem almost simultaneously,students will begin to develop a sense of what Burkemeans by "terministic smeens," the process by which afluent reader first adopts the writer's terminology.Thisadopted terminology then is contrasted with, as readingprogresses, the reader's ways of putting similar experiences and the poem's experience into words.Gradually,the writer's and the reader's terminologies come togetherto form a terminological screen through which the writerand reader come to view what were different experiencesas one. These abstract terms, however, need not be taughtto students; they are theories that are helpful in devising teaching strategies, such as the following:Describe in an introductory paragraph the "outdoorga a4 played by the narrator, the "old stone savage,"and nature in lines 28-45. Then, look back over yourprevious writings in response to sections one and twoof the poem and explain the parts played by the scene(natural world) and the three agents (the narrator,the stone savage, and the undefined "magic" in nature)in the drama of the "outdoor aame."9This exercise ought to help students to objectify thedramatic action, to accomplish what E. D. Hirsch, Jr.would call the understanding of the inferred or "probablemeaning" of the poem.10 In this case, meaning is notsimply paraphased; it is rendered in terms of the poem'sdramatic action--a perspective that will heap beginningreaders of literature develop what Louise Rosenblatt classan "aesthetic stance" as they read.11 They will, in otherwords, participate in the action represented in the poembefore they begin to make critical statevents. Puttingparticipation Wore criticism ought to help teachersavoid plot summaries and oversimplified, didactic statements of meaning.The last section of the poem (lines 28 -45) refocuses thereader's attention on different elements of the pentad. Whereas lines 1-27 place emphasis on agents operating in aparticular scenic context, the last section of the poem putsemphasis on agency (how the action is carried out) and action(what actual event takes place). The game becomes the poet'smeans of making a statement; the act of wall-building beccmesthe poet's key symbol, his way of representing indirectly anexpository statement on the human condition in a world notgoverned by any formative purpose--or, at least, not one discoverable by man. The reader, to understand and appreciate1012

KETMICKY ENGLISH BULLETINthe poem, must construct a new level of meaning as he or sheresponds to the "out door game," the narrator's question, andthe old-stone savage's ritual answer.This new level of meaning, if reader-response criticism isat all correct in its analyses of the literary reading process,must be constructed from the results of readings of earlierparts of the text. The fifth and last exercise in our sequenceof reading activities should, in consequence, lead the studentsback to their earlier oral and written responses to lines 1-27of the poem.5.Read and discuss in workshop groups the last sectionof the poem (lines 28-45). Focus on the interactionbetween the narrator and the old stone savage. Why doesthe narratorhis baiting questions? What type ofexpression, what gestures --if any --does the old-stonesavage portray as he answers? What tones of voice do bothspeakers use? What do you think the narrator is drivingat? What does he wish to accomplish? Does he accomplishit? Who really has the last word? Once these questionshave been discussed, students should take on the role ofeither the narrator or the old stone savage and answerthese questions: As narrator, why do you feel that themaxim "good fences make good neighbors" should bequestioned? What is the reasoning behind your questioning? As the old-stone savage, explain the truth of "goodfences make good neighbors." Use as much of the poem asyou can to develop your answers.This writing exercise should help students use the dramaticinteraction of outdoor game (agency) and wall-mending (action)to re-experience the previously established tension amongagents in the poem. It should enable them to see beyond thesurface images of the poem to a deeper irony in which neitherthe views of the narrator or the old-stone savage are dominant.In most secondary and beginning college classrooms thissequence of activities would, I believe, be sufficient.Itwould teach the students to enter the dramatic context of aliterary work as participants; at the same time, it would helpthem develop distance and objectivity, or what Kenneth Burkecalla "identification." Identification is a key conceptthroughout Burke's rhetoric; it represents the reader's partialsharing in and difference fro; the experience of the writer.12"Mending Wall" demands dramatic participation and a degree ofcritical-rational distance from its readcrs. Fluent readersspeculate and pr. rticipate simultaneously, using literary conventions and linguistic cues to direct their reaction to the11

RENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINcontext of the poem itself, using --in turn -- dramatic participation to keep their more abstract critical speculations undercontrol. The assignment sequence described above uses the actof writing to help students to participate and speculate, takingon increasingly more critical and abstract roles as they read.Subjective and Objective Responses to "Mending Wall"There are two alternatives available to teachers who wouldwish to take the response heuristic I have outlined herefurther up the ladder of abstraction. In college classes, bothshould be pursued, one after the other. In a secondary class,eitii2r one or the other could be managed with a relativelybrief extension in time.One alternative is subjective in nature. I do not agreewith David Bleich when he argues that, because all knowledge ofliterature has its roots in felt response, that, in turn, allliterature pedagogy should begin with subjective responses.13Without doubt, subjective response must be incorporated in thereading process, but I believe it should be brought in afterthe students have been helped by teachers to partic4ate inthe dramatic action of the poem Itselfnot as formal criticsbut as participants in the literary "event." Moving in thisdirection from the activities I have already outlined wouldentail three general possibilities:1.having students recall, list, and connect with thepoem past events that seem related to their reading of"Mending Wall";2.having, students record notes on feelings they hadwhile first reading the poem--first, in shorthand whilereading the poem, then in fuller, form after havingparticipated in the heuristics described above;3.having students go back over these two types of responses and compose an account of how their subjectivereactions compared with their more objective firstreactions to the dramatic context of the poem.College teachers who might wish to build upon theseearlier dramatic and subjective responses would bring thestudents to interpretations of authorial intention in thepoem.14 Many contemporary interpretations of this poem findirony in it, an irony in which the implied author is assumedto dismiss both the narrator's and the old-stone savage's1214

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINIn this type of reading, the ambiguity andpoints of view.tension inherent in the final lines of the poem bet /een thenarrator's and savage's ways of seeing fences in reconciledinto the implied author's firm belief in the powers of ambiguity.Non must work together or they work apart, as Frost often suggested; the wisdom of "Mending Wall," this final readingsuggests, evolves from an author who dramatically juxtaposestwo divergent views of walls to construct a third view, asynthesis of the others. Nen need wallsand things like themto keep themselves together, to keep the spirit of communityintact, even when "He is all pine and I as apple orchard."Without this sense of community, nature succeeds in forcing menapart. What seems to keep men apart--walls, fences, work ofall kinds--actually keeps them together.Bringing students to this more objective level of interpretation would demand a reconstruction of the writings producedin response to particular dramatic sequtaces as they were defined in the first-stage dramatic activities, and it woulddepend on incorporation of subjective reactions as they werecomposed in the second-stage activities. Reconstructions ofthis sort would also demand more outside information--on Frodt'swork in general, on his biography, on general literary techniques such as irony and point of view and their function inliterature in genera1.15VIWhat The Students Have LearnedLearning sequences such as those described above accomplish two general aims: they enable teachers to intervene inthe reading process in ways that will assure that students"read" literature on an active, dramatic level before theyengage in more abstract interpretation; they also assure thatstudents develop habits of selection and prediction that areconsistent with the current psycholinguistic model of readingwhen they read.16Students will also have made specific gains in understanding "Mending Wall." First, they will have moved from whatmight have been a simple acceptance of the narrator'sscepticism about walls in general to a more complex understanding of the tension between the narrator's a.:(1 the oldstone savage's views in the poem. Second, from a simpleacceptance of a didaotic moral concerning "good fences makegood neighbors" the students will have moved to a more complexrealization of the place of ambiguity in developing a set of1315

KENTUCKY ENGLISH BULLETINmoral beliefs out of the tension between the

example, "Mending Wall" is a poem told by. a New England farmer, addressed by imolication to a reader who assumes interest in. the life represent-P.: :- the poem (the. rituals and functions of farming in New :ngland), and concerning the particular activity of wall-mending. The interaction of dramatic com-

Related Documents:

CESSNA 525, 525A & 525B ATLAS WINGLET MAINTENANCE MANUAL SUPPLEMENT TAG-1100-0101 Effectivity: 525-0001 TO 525-0701, 525-0800 & ON 525A-0001 TO 525A-0300 & ON 525B-0001 TO 525B-0451 & ON 22-50 Page 9 G 2. Applicability Make Model Serial Number Cessna 525 525-0001 to 525-0701 525-0800 and on. Cessna 525A 525A-0001 to 525A-0299 525A-0300 and on.

29 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 45 0 0 1.525 46 0.00064856 0.083149 1.525 47 0.0025977 0.16675 1.525 48 0.0060637 0.27761 1.525 49 0.011479 0.41664 1.525 50 0.019063 0.55567 1.525 51 0.028812 0.69425 1.525 52 0.040727 0.83328 1.525

Colour Black, green, white REMABOND ADHESIVE SYSTEMS REMABOND Adhesive Systems 525 2619 525 1067 525 2602 Ref. No. Designation Colour Content Qty Qty/palett 525 2592 C E M E N T S C 4 0 0 0 black 350 g (390 ml) 20 1000 525 2602 C E M E N T S C 4 0 0 0 black 700 g (780 ml) 10 490 525 2619 C E M E N T S C 4 0 0 0 black 4.5 kg (5 l) 1 80

KL-650-THX or KL-525-THX LCR’s are used for front left, center, and right channels. The left and right surrounds are KS-525-THX WDST loudspeakers. The surround back speakers are narrowly spaced KL-650-THX or KL-525-THX LCR’s. In some installations, it may be preferable to use KS-

380–480450–600 315-450 40 525-6901.5-10 1.1-7.5 4 525-6901.5-10 1.1-7.5 7 525-69015-125 11-90 15 525–690 75– 350 55-315 20 525–690350–600 315-450 30 High voltage may be presen

The Bell 525 Commercial Helicopter BELL 525 OVERVIEW The Bell 525 Relentless is the latest-generation commercial twin-engine helicopter. The Bell 525 is powered by two electronically-controlled GE CT7-2F1 engines that deliver exceptional performance along with a maximum cruise speed of 160 kts (296 kph).

controller architecture. Two system control modes are typically provided on modern aircraft systems: automatic (1 active 1 stand-by) and manual (back-up). Some of the main applicable regulations for ECS are per Transport Canada’s Airworthiness Manual Chapter 525: 525.831 Ventilation 525.832 Cabin Ozone Concentration 525.841 Pressurised Cabins

Operational Evaluation Board Report Cessna Citation 525C (CJ4) 22 Oct 2010 OSD FC Original Replaces and incorporates the OEB reports for the Cessna 525 (CJ, CJ1, CJ2, CJ1 , CJ2 , CJ3) and for the Cessna 525 (CJ4). Addition of the Cessna 525 M2 operational suitability data. 20 Jun 2014 OSD FC Rev 1 OSD Data for Cessna 525 CJ3 incorporated.