mju13
New Member
Posts: 13 
|
Post by mju13 on Feb 6, 2016 11:48:38 GMT -5
I thought this portion of the chapter was really interesting and very important. The author defines “Mushfake” as making do with something less when the real thing is not available. He also mentions how this could be both good and bad for students at high needs schools. While being able to make do with something that isn't the real thing does show adaptability and willingness to learn, it's also something that shouldn't even be occurring. Every student should have the equal opportunity to learn the same content and have access to it and not just "make do" with anything. What are your thoughts on Mushfake and do you think it's something that's good or bad for students?
|
|
|
|
Post by ashleyygreen12 on Feb 8, 2016 12:20:51 GMT -5
I think mushfake is a really interesting concept and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Making do with what you have is a reality for many students and allows them to take a shortcut to where they need to be. It kind of reminds me of the concept "fake it till you make it." Which is something I'm pretty sure that every person does. We tend to pretend we have it together until we actually have it together or the concept of "dressing for the job we want" that so many of our professors tell us when considering how we dress at our field experience assignments. All of these concepts tend to propel us forward rather than set us back so I don't think the concept of mushfake is negative.
|
|
|
|
Post by loganc on Feb 9, 2016 16:37:53 GMT -5
I agree with you, Ashley! I do not think that mushfake is a bad thing either. I also compared it to "fake it till you make it" and as Spradlin used to say "server face" ("yes, what can I help you with?" *smile on face even though you're annoyed). That is something that I believe everyone does, not just students at high needs schools. I believe that this is something that we do until we "have it together", as Ashley worded that. It's almost as if we "fake it" until we actually have it together and we don't even realize when "faking it" becomes acting "making it". As a whole, I feel like this is a valuable trait to have, but I also understood this concept in a positive way and as a "skill".
|
|
|
|
Post by jjtylr on Feb 10, 2016 13:28:35 GMT -5
Mushfaking seems, at least to me, to be a generally good thing. And I think the author definitely advocates this, as well. It almost acts as a sort of coping mechanism for students who might feel subjugated or apart from the dominant discourse. So, I think anything that allows these students to at least feel like they can begin to "acquire" the dominant discourse is a good thing. You could argue that "mushfaking" is bad because it prevents students from genuinely attempting to acquire or learn the discourse. However, the author says, "this is by no means to demean our efforts at acquisition and learning within the Discourse" (251). I tend to agree with what the author is saying here. The biggest obstacle for outsiders to overcome is not their "mushfaking" or other strategies to learn a new discourse but rather the discourses' elites who attempt to keep outsiders away and prevent them from acquiring the discourse. Mushfaking seems like a good way for outsiders to prevent this from happening and strive towards a better understanding and acquisition (if only partial) of the discourse.
|
|
|
|
Post by andryahr on Feb 10, 2016 14:27:19 GMT -5
I think if done correctly, mushfaking can be a great thing. I agree that it can be used in a "fake it til you make it" manner like Logan and Ashley mention. If one learns by doing, this is a great tactic. However I worry that someone who mushfakes can lose sight of who they are, more like fake it til you believe it. I would never want one of my students to feel like they had to adjust to the discourse so much that they became someone they weren't. I understand adjusting to a new discourse is important to feel comfortable but maybe adjusting is enough rather than changing. I know when I came to Florida State I felt like I couldn't be myself, people would tell me I was too loud and overbearing. This was the norm for me, I'm from Miami and that's just how everyone is there. I suddenly became more reserved so people would like me, therefore changing for this discourse. I hated myself for doing this, I wasn't being myself and it held me back even further from making friends because I became very self-conscious. Since realizing that I took it to far, I have just adjusted my personality. I am more reserved in how I physically interact (in Miami we hug A LOT) with others but I'm still loud and obnoxious. I did mushfake my entire freshman year and it was a terrible idea on my part, I barely got to enjoy my freshman year of college and I would never want that for one of my students.
|
|
|
|
Post by hayley on Feb 10, 2016 17:24:50 GMT -5
I agree with what Ashley said. I think "Mushfake" would push me to do better in my work. And that reminds me one of my teacher when I was in Grade 5. I grew up in a small town in China. Actually, there are very few people know English and even in local schools, most of English teachers they speak English with a strong accent. In that time, it seems like only my teacher's pronunciation is good in my town. Everybody in the town believed that his pronunciation is perfect because every time when he talks with parents about how to improve English speaking, he looks very confident as he is an expert. He ran his personal English Training school in our small town so many of my classmates studied in his training school with great passion, because we think our oral English are much better than others whose teacher is not him. Obviously, his business was successful. But now, when I look back and I know that his pronunciation is definitely not perfect and I know he exactly knows that. But, I really appreciate his help in that time and I would like to say he really works hard, because now I still believed that it is him who motivates me in Learning English. I just want to say he is really a successful teacher who always provides positive feedback to us and, of course, a very successful businessman in running his English training school.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaylynj on Feb 10, 2016 17:25:27 GMT -5
I agree with Logan and Ashley that mushfaking can be a good thing, and the whole "fake it till you make it" idea. This topic reminds me of being a little kid and being given markers/crayons and a blank sheet of paper to draw my own pictures. I wasn't sure how to draw something or maybe even what I was drawing, but at that age I was attempting to do something. I would always finish as ask my family what they thought I drew and would just answer to whatever someone thought my picture was. I would rather have students fake it until they actually understand it rather than completely turn away from what they need to learn. Students are trying and "faking" it until they are able to gain the skill and knowledge they need. I would not say mushfaking is a bad trait for a student to have.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaylawebb on Feb 11, 2016 14:41:54 GMT -5
I really like the concept of mushfaking. I live my life like that basically; fake it til you make it. My worry for students that are faking it until they make it, is that they are too scared to ask for help when they really do not get it and they might not be able to preform as well if they had stopped and asked for help. I think that having the trait of a mushfaker as a student could be damaging because one day they might be able to fake their way through something and they would have wished that they actually learned the skill instead of faking it the whole time.
|
|
|
|
Post by angelawithee on Feb 17, 2016 9:08:35 GMT -5
I like the term "mushfaking" which essentially means to fake it until you make it. I would view this as something that could be good or bad in regards to students doing this in the classroom. On one side, students are often still acquiring a basic overall comprehension of the material, for example, a student who only sparknotes a book will still get the central themes. Howerver, this can lead to the student missing out on getting a deeper meaning.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarahaubreyr on Feb 17, 2016 18:18:30 GMT -5
I completely agree with the people above me. I believe that mushfaking is a "fake it until you make it" concept. Everyone needs the time to gain the skills, so it makes sense that they would fake it until they actually grasp the concept. I know that this was something I did with math. I would work on problems and fake it until I could actually grasp how the problem was supposed to properly be solved. I also think people do this in their day to day lives. It is better than not trying at all in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by lexxy95 on Feb 17, 2016 18:35:37 GMT -5
I agree, mushfaking is cool..But from a student standpoint. I honestly feel like I mushfaked my way through high school, and it worked for me, so I then did it in college. I never read the novels I was suppose to in high school. I would sparknote at the last minute and still receive an A on the tests, which pretty much means that the tests were pretty surface leveled, not really asking us for deeper thinking. Because it worked in high school, I came to college doing it and it still worked. This all pretty much just tells me that the type of learning required of us is shallow. We don't really have to know anything to succeed, we just have to know how to pretend that we do. I'm pretty sure that if I wanted to, I could make it through college without reading my textbooks adequately(not that I would do that;I). Meaning I could make it in the real world by simply mushfaking. The world is made up of mushfakers..Successful ones, but mushfakers nonetheless. I actually see this as a bad thing though, unlike most of my peers, at least from a teacher standpoint... To me, the fact that it's so easy to successfully mushfake means that teachers need to step their games up and require some actual thinking.. That's all.
|
|
|
|
Post by loganc on Feb 25, 2016 9:41:56 GMT -5
To me, this idea of mushfaking correlates to the concept that George talked about with us in our small group yesterday: legitimate peripheral participation, because, while mushfaking is "faking it until you make it", LPP, is the step before you actually get it. So, in the range of LPP, you fake it until you make it! Am I the only one thinking this way?
|
|
