Synthesis of Our Analyses of Students’ Novice/Expert
Comparisons
Step II of Round II What Is Literary Studies (CR’s Class, F06)
Introductory comments about my synthesizing process
I liked how Nancy organized her synthesis of Round 1, so for the sake of
consistency I tried to mimic that format when possible.
Patterns of our patterns
The most basic of goals: students did recognize that there is indeed a
difference between expert and novice readings, and being an “expert”
requires skill and practice.
Aside from those who misunderstood the assignment (most peculiarly, those who
disagreed with the “expert” interpretations and argued for the correctness of the
“novice” work, including textually narcissistic interpretations like Million’s), there
were quite a few accurate paraphrases of the expert position and the novice
position, some of which help clarify and perhaps improve on our own
explanations. (NC)
In relation to the above, students were also able to articulate who the
novice reader is and what his shortcomings are. When juxtaposed with our
definition of an “expert,” this allowed for the possibility of a continuum like
that Nancy discussed in her analysis.
Students identified the following as novice techniques based on the provided
examples:
 Guesses, editorializing, fictionalizing, or generalizing
 Useless psychoanalyzing
 Superimposing personal feelings
 Speculation
 Impressionistic rather than textually grounded interpretations
 Assumptions sans evidence
(HH)

Novices “took the surface meaning of the poem” (Silfies), “make a lot of
guesses and only blanket generalizations” (Owens), focus on “chunks of
the poem at a time” (Bower), “lacked evidence” and “attention to format”
(Vils), may “not quote the text directly” and are sometimes “personal and
shallow” (Miller), et al.
(NC)
1. We’re seeing that the lesson effectively forces students to recognize the
importance of, and focus on, individual words as units of meaning.
Basically, experts get to the “micro” level of the text.

A number of students were able to identify very specific advanced
techniques that included…unpacking specific words, using etymology,
connotation definitions or implications (HH)

As hoped, a few students realized that, hey, you actually have to focus on
specific words, and interpretation often hinges on a single word. They
recognized that experts are looking “closer,” hence, “close reading.” (CR)

In her individual analysis, Nancy included a student quote about experts
going “word for word” through a text.
2. A subcategory of the above would be a reference to the good old
dictionary—students often seemed surprised that experts looked up words
and spent time discussing them.
3. We all agreed that the lesson is bringing literary device, figurative
language, genre, and other reading techniques to the students’ attention—
they recognize that these help them to gain meaning from the text.

A number of students were able to identify very specific advanced
techniques that included…Analysis of figurative vs. literal language and
literary devices: assonance, alliteration, paradox, tension, ambiguity, irony,
poetic form, simile, metaphor, personification. (HH)

Students recognized that experts use devices/tools, or strategies that the
novice doesn’t. This was one of the more successful areas in terms of
specifics. (CR)
4. We also agreed that students were recognizing the need for, and
importance of, textual evidence when forwarding an interpretation. There
were many student excerpts to support this.
5. Students recognized context as being important, whether biographical or
cultural context. Although no student directly said that such context were
to be used only when appropriate, none of them used such contexts as the
sole basis for their readings of “The Harlem Dancer.”
6. In reference to the above, many students were able to recognize that
novice readers often stray too far away from the text, or out of context, into
the realm of pure speculation without any evidence.
7. Although rare, one or two students did, after reading the lecture
materials, pick up on the importance of “the speaker” or narrator of a text,
and that this itself must be interpreted.
My overall observation and connection to SU06
synthesis

Numbers 3, 4, 5, and 6 all successfully carried over from our first trip
through the lesson.

I would say that Nancy’s students, on our first run through this lesson,
went much more in-depth than my students did. I found her students
much more willing and interested in the project. That said, I think the
basic goals carried over and were achieved. My hope for the future would
be that the lecture materials take a stronger hold in the students’ minds.
The PowerPoint was much more successful the firs time through than the
second, which leads me to conclude that the presentation itself, when in
the right hands, is effective. (I could say much more here, but let’s say that
it was an uphill battle this semester with many of the students—I’d say that
around five students really came into the class wanting to read and learn,
while most of the others were offended when I asked for depth and effort.
I always take the blame for this and need to work on new ways to inspire
students in an online environment.)

Because many of the students obviously wrote this reflection without
referring back to the lecture materials, there were a lot of generalities
when specifics would have been much more helpful.