What got me taking into consideration the “teaching is communicating is writing is teaching” cycle (begin to see the title) was a web-based incident I possessed a couple of years back after i was going for a Master’s Course in Special Education.
Each week, the ‘mentor’ for that online class released 3-5 questions for that students to reply to. Our assignment also incorporated answering a minimum of three from the solutions provided by our classmates, that have been published where many of us often see them. 1 week among the questions was, “Is teaching communicating? Give causes of the way to go.”
My answer was something like, “Well, obviously teaching is communicating. How will you educate without communicating? Communicating is delivering a note in one person to a different, and teaching can also be delivering a note in one person to a different. However in teaching there’s specific set on giving a note about something which the crowd does not know.”
Once I submitted that answer, I reflected onto it, and that i recognized that in communications that aren’t formal teaching situations, even so there’s a necessity to state something the crowd does not know.
I reasoned something similar to this: “If you are not communicating something totally new, then you are communicating something already known or familiar-quite simply, old-towards the receiver from the message. And just what will be the reason for communicating something which the receiver already knows? That would be pointless? So every communication that is not nonsense should have something totally new for that receiver, or it’s pointless for sender and receiver.”
Which caused me to consider all of the teaching that occurs through writing, for example within our online class. Obviously, that triggered and fit perfectly with another large thought I’m coping with for a long time: The concept that the most crucial factor on paper is, What’s a new comer to the readers.
So here’s that three-way connection:
Teaching is communicating
Communicating is teaching
Writing is communicating
Communicating is writing
So writing is teaching
Which is much more simply mentioned as,
Teaching is communicating is writing is teaching
Keep in mind that bit about new and old, within the fifth paragraph, above? Since writing is communicating and writing is teaching, it does not seem sensible to create what’s old and already recognized to the readers-you need to write what’s a new comer to the readers if you do not, then you’ve no message and you are boring your readers.
The issue in communications theory, teaching theory, and writing theory is the fact that, What’s a new comer to the readers (or audience) is overlooked and neglected in support of the types of communicating, teaching, and writing. Form is simple to explain and simple to mimic. What’s new is about content, though, and it is more difficult to find.
Why? Because new has always meant an enormous, dark, mysterious box within our minds associated with everything available that-
we’ve not yet experienced
we’ve not yet read or learned about
we’ve not yet considered
All of individuals products is a big world by itself. So we simply haven’t were built with a small group of effective groups to assist us deal with everything newness available within the unlimited world.
This type of small group of effective groups of newness (five or fewer could be optimal or best, right?) would greatly assist the content part of communications theory and exercise, teaching theory and exercise, and writing theory and exercise, not agree? But who on the planet has such some effective groups, a typical set shared by the 3 theories?