Playing the Game
I had this interesting thought the other day. I was coming out of a test and I don't think I did super-great... well enough to pass and not much better. About halfway through the semester and one of my professors are now taking the time to start testing us. So, I didn't know what to expect (from this guy) going into the test. I had my buttocks kicked.
Anyway, I was walking back across campus (to work) and had this interesting thought strike me:
You are not meant to master the material.
Wow. Think about that. I am not meant to master the material. In fact, I am merely meant to get enough of a grasp (possibly already established, but possibly not) to pass tests and prove that I have the ability to move forward; but I am not meant to master the material.
My time at school will not translate into me knowing everything there is to know about a subject. Being an English major does not mean I will have even a good grasp of literary theory (which is a good thing as I really dislike literary theory and find it one of those things that falls into the realm of reason many professors have a job and excuse to not have any real skills).
So, if I am not meant to master the subjects I am taking, what is it I am meant to do?
Well, that would be a good question if we were having a conversation and you were (also) concerned about your college education.
The answer:
You are meant to get a good enough grasp on the subject matter to determine what you will do with it.
Yeah. That's it. You are supposed to learn enough about the subject to determine whether or not you will pursue it further (in your degree), or if you will forget all about it, grump about having to have that (particular) class, and complain about the poor score forevermore.
Mastery, however, is not within the realm of the undergraduate... or, for that matter, even the graduate student. In fact, mastery is something that professionals do; and those who choose to try and advance the current literature in theory. Theory of English, theory of writing, theory of Evolution, theory of composites, theory of education, theory of family life, theory of music, and etc.
At the point you are advancing theory, that is when you are expected to be a master.
But what makes someone a master of a subject.
Let's look at eLang to try and uncover that.
The professor I have (name withheld to protect the wicked) stood in front of the classroom. He started to spell a word. Turned to the class (a lot of English majors) and asked, "How is this word spelled?" He then proceeded to outline two or three different spellings and then stopped, thought about it for a few seconds, settled on one, and spelled it out, proceeding with his lecture.
As he made his decision, though, we were let into his process of determining the spelling. Specifically, what era of the English Language he was thinking about, how the words were spelled at different points in time; when that particular word entered the language, and how it should be spelled compared to how it is or was spelled. All of this happened in about 45 seconds.
You see, this guy is never on time, he sets very ambiguous standards, he is unkempt a lot of the time, loses track of what he is doing; and has already had to reset his syllabus and reading schedule to account for delays in the semester (caused by him); but when it comes to mastery of his subject (History of the English language) he knew exactly what he was talking, how it applied, why it was applicable to what he was teaching, and how best to translate (within his other skill sets) to his audience, the students.
That denotes mastery.
And that is where we get back to school and my thought as I crossed campus, the other day. I am not meant to master the subject matter. I, however, am meant to understand it enough to pass tests (arbitrary bench marks), and to do well in my education; but I am not meant to master the material.
As an English major, my intent is to have a degree so I can move on and get more degrees. As an individual, my intent is to become good enough at writing to be published in fiction and (maybe) advance the theory on writing education. I am not, however, interested in literary theory or how that plays into literature; I am not interested in how the English Language changed from an offshoot of the Germanic languages with early influences from the Nordic and later influences from the French and Latin (and even more influences from Native North American languages) as well as African, Spanish, and Asian languages. None of this, in truth, advances my ability to adequately do what I want to be doing; but it is required for me to a) pass this calls, and b) move on to whatever comes next.
Mastery is a result of:
- Interest in the subject
- Concerted effort to master the subject
- Practice of material within the subject
- Feedback on personal goals, theories, and publications on subject
- Identification as an authority of subject
Some of these things come as a result of education. Because I am a student and because I am trying to advance my education to the PhD level, I will become an expert in some field (this is de facto). On top of that, improving my skills as a writer through concerted efforts and attempts to get published also advances my prominence as an authority. Publishing on the act of writing, the process, and any theories I may have, also advances my prominence as an authority. All of this, ultimately, leads to others looking at me as an authority and asking me to speak, write, teach, and etc. within my chosen field.
As an undergraduate, regardless of skill or time, I am not a qualified master - and graduation will not make me one. It merely allows me onto the path of mastery - a path that allows for a de facto mastery and not always a literal mastery of material.
John Hattaway | smokingpen | Alicia Grey | Clockwork Princess | Cassandra West
Real Heroes Fly