Self Evaluation

This class has definitely been a love hate class that I've had issues with. I certainly wasn't a great student - but at the same time, I wasn't a student who “struggled” with the material. Rather, I was a student who made the decision to selectively engage with the class and its material...and it is from this “diffractive” position that I want to write. To begin with, this was definitely a class that was different from the others that I have taken – it was a class that required engagement, an active as opposed to a passive approach. It was thus that I engage at moments where I understood it to be absolutely necessary. I find it interesting to note my attitude towards this class: whereas I saw the work for all my other classes as mandatory, I somehow saw certain aspects of this class as less than mandatory. The readings were a given...like any other class. I can't say that I disliked any of the readings. I had difficulties with the biology text, but otherwise felt as if I very much enjoyed and engaged with the other texts. This semester in particular, I've been taking “history of anthropological theory”, as well as “anthropology of the body” - in light of this, I was really able to see how the texts for this class connected to everything else. It seemed as if all my classes stressed a postmodern and phenomenological analysis, while also providing different theoretical backgrounds to compare with - which was definitely the case with Barad and the concept of diffraction. Thus, I really like how applicable this class was in relation to everything else: whereas those classes were theory heavy..this class seemed to be lighter application of that theory. Besides the readings, the writing assignments, class attendance, and participation were also viewed as givens. For all of my projects, I felt as if I did the work and I put in the effort, but I didn't go above and beyond. The first project was tedious for me, whereas I got more into the second, third and fourth projects. I definitely see a progression with regards to thinking in an interactive manner. My first paper wasn't meant for an actual audience, whereas my later work was. Overall, I think that both the difficulties and advancements I've had in this class are related to “interacting” with others, and working across boundaries. It seems as if my previous academic experiences have been more rigidly structured and more focused on the individual student, and it is from this position that I felt out of place. I was used to writing for teachers, not for peers, and never before had my writings been reviewed in such a public way. It is therefore that I feel as if my work has broadened, and that I've become a bit more comfortable with scrutiny and interaction. With regards to participation, I missed two classes....for which I did do readings but didn't do postings. With regards to in class participation, I had difficulties speaking up within the larger group setting, but did contribute to the smaller break-away groups that we often had. This was an aspect of class that I very much enjoyed – what I liked was the ability to interact with my peers in real time, to discuss in a manner that I thought felt more connected and perhaps more emotionally charged. This contrasted very much to the web postings, which I felt weren't engaging (for me personally). Looking back, (when I'm not dreading the actual grade I got), I view it as an intriguing experiment almost – seeing how I behaved as a student when given a different set of parameters. Evidently, I engaged with the material, but fell a bit short when it came to engaging with people – which is certainly a bit of insight that I will keep in mind henceforth.