| Subject | : | Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-23-2000 on 10:20 a.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear People, I love ACOR as much as anyone, but the weakest element seems to me to be the mediocrity (or worse!) of so many of the lectures. This is also true of ICOC, of course. Thus, I was surprised to see Jerry wishing for an extra day in order for the lectures to be offered more than once, so attendees wouldn't have to miss many. I confess to having missed one or two that I wanted to attend, but most of the conflicts I had were resolved when I went to what I thought would be the best of the talks scheduled at some particular time and walked out of it after 10 to 15 minutes to go to the next best. Usually, I walked out of that one, too. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Patrick+Weiler |
| Date | : | 04-24-2000 on 01:20 a.m. |
| jpweil00@gte.net Steve, This was my first ACOR. I, too, did not get to attend all of the seminars I would have liked. All of those which I did attend included slide presentations. All but one of these presentations encountered some difficulty with the slide projectors, from skipped slides to confusion regarding which screen was controlled by which remote. I was surprised that there were no Power Point computer presentations. With this type of presentation one can "package" the fundamentals and make it available for others to view later quite readily. Granted, there are added costs associated with this type of presentation. In addition, there can be mechanical complications, such as waiting for computers to boot up, etc. Problems can happen during any presentation, though. I recently attended a conference where various media projectors were available for the speakers. Good projectors and polished presentations on a computer can run circles around the "old-fashion" slide show. I suspect that by the next ACOR, some of the presentations will be done this way. One could possibly even review the Power Point particulars of some of the missed lectures on equipment provided by either the ACOR or an affiliated vendor. As far as the mediocrity of the lectures, is that an indictment of the state of rug studies, a reflection of the competence of the lecturers (I suspect that most of the lecturers do not do this for a living), an effect of having ICOC and ACOR so close to each other that not enough time had passed for significant advances/discoveries/research to occur (recall Jerry's suggestion for more time between rug events), or, even, is it that each of us has areas of particular interest that cannot possibly be explored in sufficient detail at a short one hour lecture to be materially satisfying? Patrick Weiler |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-24-2000 on 06:22 a.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear Patrick, I think all of the factors you mentioned contribute to the generally poor quality of the presentations at ACOR and ICOC. I should mention that my experience with professional societies' conventions is that the talks tend to be poor at those, too. The fact is, most people are not very good public speakers, many don't bother to prepare their talks, and in the rug world there is so much fantasy in the mix as to leave the listener confued rather than enlightened. Why have conventions at all, if the talks (which make up the bulk of the official program) are so bad? Funny you should ask. For one thing, some of the talks are outstanding, and there's no way to know in advance which those will be, so you just have to go to the ones that look promising and hope for the best (You have to kiss a lot of frogs if you want to find Prince Charming). The occasional great session makes going to the others worthwhile. The interaction with other collectors, the exhibitions, the dealer fair, and the good sessions interspersed with the others; all these make ACOR and ICOC more than worth the time, trouble and expense of attending. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Michael Wendorf |
| Date | : | 04-24-2000 on 10:10 a.m. |
| Dear All: My single criticism of ACOR is the increasing reliance on slides and lecturing by the presenters. Having attended every ACOR ever held, it is my recollection that ACOR itself was begun as a "hands on" conference in which papers, lectures and slide shows would be avoided in favor of small interactive focus sessions in which the focus would be rugs or textiles related to the specific thesis or topic. The first ACOR still provides some of my fondest memories of rug conferences. At that ACOR Mike Tschebull brought a large number of Sarab rugs of high quality. I have never seen such a large number of good quality examples in one place before or after. John Collins brought in a large number of Bidjars, again you would have a great difficulty seeing so many good examples of a type in any other place. Other lectures also focused on the rugs. John Wertime did a session with what seemed like 100s of bags and small pieces. I think ACOR has lost some of this focus and interaction even though the size has been kept small in an overt effort to maintain the "hands on" or more intimate approach. Increasingly, I sense the focus gravitating toward the "dealers row" and an atrium setting perhaps due to the success of the Santa Monica ACOR where that forum was first used. I do not have a strong feeling about this drift toward dealer's row. However, I do have a sense of loss about the programs. Like Steve, I was disappointed by most of the program sessions. While it is true that most are not professional lecturers, they should not have to be. They should be discussing rugs, something many of them do daily. The problems with slides, the lack of any clear thesis and organization all become exaggerated when there are not many rugs or when the rugs are collected willy nilly at the last minute and fail to advance whatever the thesis or theme might have been. There will always be some lectures that necessarily focus on slides, one example was a lecture on old Anatolian kilims found in Ethiopia that I found fascinating, but they should be limited. The format I am suggesting should be the rule is one more like the sessions by Michael Rothberg and Mike Tschebull which, while not particularly interactive, presented good pieces as the focus on their presentations with comments and thesis coming from the pieces rather than vice versa. The source of this problem is difficult to identify. Perhaps it has something to do with the distance many of the presenters are travelling. However, my understanding is that ACOR provides presenters with at least some transportation subsidy for shipping rugs, this should be increased or better promoted along with a clear directive that if you agree to present a session, it ought to be with the understanding that examples will predominate and be the "focus" of the session. ACOR might also consider that every speaker be required to submit a list of rugs and program outline 3 or 6 months in advance. No matter who the speaker or the topic, it is my belief that sessions with lots of rugs and interaction leave the deepest and most lasting impression. One further comment. The single most memorable moment for me came from the host of this Salon and during Herr Kirchheim's opening remarks. As Herr Kirchheim described having to travel to Texas and eat testicles to acquire a rug he had to have, Jerry intoned with perfect timing, "his or yours?" Thank you, Michael Wendorf |
| Subject | : | Does the speaker have to be a pro to be good? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-24-2000 on 02:50 p.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear Michael, I'd like to address one of the sentences in your post: While it is true that most are not professional lecturers, they should not have to be. You're absolutely right, you don't have to be professional lecturers to do a decent job of making a presentation. In fact, my 8 year old does one in school almost every week. What he understands, and what some of the speakers at ACOR (and ICOC and all too many meetings of professional organizations) don't understand, is that it takes preparation to give a decent talk. When someone gets up to speak without having rehearsed, gone over the substance, or planned the presentation pretty carefully, the outcome is likely to be bad. There are a few people with enough natural talent to be able to pull it off that way, but most of us need to do our homework. And not doing so is an insult to the audience. It's presumptuous to think that it's OK for perhaps 100 people or more to give up an hour to listen to us, but that we don't need to spend an hour or two organizing what they have to say. Perhaps ACOR and ICOC could distribute some simple tips on public speaking to those on the program. I do it with our graduate students here, and it really seems to help. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Michael Wendorf |
| Date | : | 04-24-2000 on 03:14 p.m. |
| Dear Steve: Of course, preparation and practice would also help, but it still needs to be focused on the rugs. In any event, I do think it is a little unfair to compare any rug person with your 8 year old Nathan. Few of us have the presence, natural talent or good nature that he has. I for one could never compete. And he is a good swimmer to boot! Michael Wendorf |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-24-2000 on 04:01 p.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear Michael, I wasn't disagreeing with anything you had said in your first post, and can hardly argue with anything in the second one. I was just pointing out that it doesn't take a professional speaker to give a decent presentation. And, as you re-emphasize, without something interesting (like a rug, or better, a bunch of rugs, or even better, a bunch of really good rugs) to talk about, no amount of preparation will save the day. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Mike+Tschebull |
| Date | : | 04-25-2000 on 09:49 p.m. |
| If I may, let's go back to the isue of why few presenters at ACOR bring rugs and textiles to illustrate their sessions. My own experience may help put this issue in perspective: 1) Transit is risky, time-consuming to set up, and expensive - no matter who pays the freight and insurance bill. 2) Pieces can be damaged or stolen in the confusion after a session, when dozens of people are boiling around the stage. Hanging fragile pieces on ACOR-provided easels also has the potential of producing damage. 3) Many presenters simply don't have the goods - or enough appropriate examples, and it's a hassle to borrow things and be responsible for them. 4) Jockying pieces up and down for the audience to see is awkward, eats up presentation time, breaks concentration, and rquires the good will of relatively tall people like Michael (Thank you, again) to provide the muscle. 5) Slides are in general easier to control; it's easier to organize your thoughts, and you can use notes more easily than you can when you're doing a session with live pieces. I think the ACORs want more live presentations next time - it's more rewarding for the audience - and will come to grips with the related issues that they can control. A better conference requires constructive feedback and new ideas, so please pitch in! |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 06:22 a.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear Mike, I was sitting next to Jerry at the session where the distinctive sound of textile ripping accompanied shifting the position of an item of the easel, so your point about the hazard to using live displays was really emphasized to me. It is a dilemma. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Marvin Amstey |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 09:29 a.m. |
| mamstey1@rochester.rr.com I can appreciate Mike's point about transporting, manipulating and guarding one's rugs that might be brought for a presentation. What about the idea of using some of the dealers' material, gleaned from dealers' row - without attribution. The material is already at hand; the dealer can pay attention to his goods; the speaker gets examples that are necessary for the presentation. Since the dealers are there a few days before the presentation, and the lecturer knows what he/she wishes to say - presumably - the lecturer simply has to walk the row to find examples that illustrate his/her point. Obviously, if the lecturer is stuck on 16th c. pieces, there will be a dearth of material. As I think about it, a presentation about what is on offer among dealers would be an interesting session. Regards, Marvin |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Yon Bard |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 09:35 a.m. |
| If I were planning a lecture at ACOR I'd hardly wish to rely on dealers turning up with just the right illustrations for my talk, not to mention their being willing to lend it for this purpose. I can just see approaching a dealer with 'Hey you, I don't want to endanger my pieces by bringing them to a session, how about you lending me yours?' Regards, Yon |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Mike+Tschebull |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 09:42 a.m. |
| Marvin - I used a few dealers' pieces this past ACOR in my session. On the face of it, that's the easiest way to go. But the issue of being responsible for others' goods still holds. And it is generally better to show things that are not for sale, which reduces potential conflicts. Dealers' Row at ACOR is overwhelming enough, as it is now. |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Michael Wendorf |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 10:16 a.m. |
| Dear Readers: Marvin's suggestion regarding a session focused on what is on dealer's row sounds like a terrible opportunity to promote some pieces and some dealers over others. Taken to the extreme, why not just offer each dealer a focus session in which he/she describes the items he/she has brought to sell? That would simplify everything. In general, I think ACOR's focus has drifted far enough or even too far toward the dealer's row and the bazaar atmosphere for me. Such a session would be counterproductive from my point of view. I also think the idea of telling or suggesting or even allowing a presenter of a focus session to show up and hope that examples to illustrate the focus session can be found and borrowed from dealer's row would only promote haphazard and poorly organized presentations. In effect, this suggestion would mean that what a presenter found on dealer's row hours before a session to dictate the session. I think we ought to throw this idea right out the window. If someone has nothing to say, they should decline the invitation to present a session. If a person has something to say but is either unable or unwilling to identify and secure examples to illustrate what they are saying, then they should also decline. The problems Mike Tschebull identifies with regard to transit, security and hassel are real, but not insurmountable. If Mike and others can do it, so can the others. I think accepting an invitation to speak requires a certain level of commitment and responsiblity, that commitment and responsibility probably ought to be addressed by ACOR directly with it speakers. For example, "We expect our speakers to have prepared at least an outline of their session by a date certain, we expect the session to be illustrated by at least ___ number of rugs from whatever sources to support the thesis or theme of the session. The pieces and sources ought to be identified to our committee at least three months in advance of the conference. Slides ought to number no more than 20-25 and only to supplement the examples brought for illustration. We understand this is a significant commitment and responsibility, but it is necessary to make the sessions a good experience for everyone. If you feel you cannot honor this commitment or responsibility, we ask that you decline our invitation to present." Of course, there will always be some sessions that are bound to slides or other related materials, and properly so, but the majority ought to adhere to the hands-on rug format and the level of commitment and preparation ought to be the same. In any event, the idea of showing up and throwing a bunch of things together from what might be on dealer's row may seem to arguably solve the problem of examples, but it exacerbates many others. Thank you, Michael Wendorf |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 10:18 a.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear Marvin, Public discussions of some of the things on Dealer's Row would be great fun for the audience, and the dealers who sell at ACOR are a pretty knowledgable and forthright group, so misrepresentation is pretty unusual. On the other hand, the promotional and, for lack of a better word, antipromotional possibilities of doing this could turn some sessions into food fights, especially if the matter of selling price entered the discussion. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Marvin Amstey |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 05:38 p.m. |
| Whew! Enough, guys; I get the message: that I idea doesn't fly. Anybody else want to stick their neck out? Regards, Marvin |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Tom+Cole |
| Date | : | 04-26-2000 on 10:54 p.m. |
| I managed to borrow enough examples from Anne Halley as well as call upon things from my own collection of material to assist in my presentation on Baluch flatweaves. There was a considerable amount of confusion at the end of the allotted period, exasperated by the unyielding scheduling and strident orders from an ACOR organizer to get out of the room immediately. That sort of behavior and inflexible timing (after all, what does another five minutes matter if one needs that much time to pack up in an orderly manner the textiles we had brought) is a real deterrent to my further participation with a textile only presentation. I may have to resort to slides in the future, unfortunately, as many who saw the "lecture" said they enjoyed the 'show'. And as far as touching the textiles after the presentation, those who touched them were the ones who assisted with packing up. And wouldn't you know it, the one piece I had borrowed from a dealer disappeared, albeit briefly but with the thousand dollar price tag on it, I was a bit on the nervous side. Just a few of the problems I encountered, but I had always thought the difference between ACOR and ICOC presentations was the opportunity to handle and see real material during and after a lecture. Correct me if I am wrong. |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Mike+Tschebull |
| Date | : | 04-27-2000 on 09:05 a.m. |
| A very cursory reading of the ACOR5 schedule shows that, after Tom Cole's session, the walls separating the three session rooms had to be opened up for the succeeding plenery, and hundreds of chairs had to be rearranged. It takes time. I'm sure the hotel demanded every second allotted to rearrange the space. As Clint Eastwood said, you've got to understand your limitations. |
| Subject | : | RE:Designing Rug Meeting (including ACOR) Sessions |
| Author | : | R. John Howe |
| Date | : | 04-27-2000 on 07:12 p.m. |
| Dear folks - Since I have made my living now for almost 30 years as an instructional designer and trainer, I have some views of the issues being discussed here. I share with Michael Wendorf the view that the default design of rug meetings should not be a front-of-the-room lecture by an authority. If learning is the objective of a rug meeting or presentation, we need to begin to acknowledge and to begin to act in terms of one of the few things agreed among those who study learning. Learning is an activity solely, exclusively of learners rather than of teachers. Yet whenever we want to produce learning we seem invariably to begin to plan teaching. What we should be planning is what the learners will be doing in this session that will likely foster their learning. What we usually do is assume that they will sit quietly hip to hip during the lecture and then that they will ask interesting questions afterward and that perhaps there will be a "good discussion. I want to suggest that this default learning design is as impoverished as it is pervasive. It is not that hard to set some reasonable learning objectives for a given sessions and then to structure some experiences (yes hands on frequently) that provide learners opportunities to achieve these objectives. Basic session objective: How to recognize both a symmetric knot and a asymmetric knot. Design: provide learners with brief written materials containing both descriptions and especially various drawings or photos of these two knots. Then present the learners with a series of numbered rugs, some with knots easy to recognize and some with knots more difficult to see (i.e., fine knots or pieces with depressed warps in which part of the knot is hidden). Ask them to use the written resource materials to determine what kinds of knots there are in each rug. Let them work in pairs or singly but ask them to write their decisions on an answer sheet and not to discuss things generally in the group. When everyone has finished examining and recording their decisions about every rug, pass out an answer sheet and ask them to correct their answers. Ask and respond to questions. Designs like this one can be fashioned rather readily for learning objectives this simple (don't over-estimate the skill levels of knot recognition among even quite experienced people) or for skills as advanced (this example for Mike) how to recognize a Shah Savan pile weaving. I also agree with Michael's suggestion that we should be getting our hands on rugs a lot in rug meetings and conventions but I also want to acknowledge that some of the practical considerations Mike and others have mentioned (like moving lots of rugs, some borrowed, cross-country)are very real and I see no virtue in converting that into a moral issue. But we should try to get more rugs into ACOR sessions again to the extent that it is possible. Having said that, it is also important to notice that there are some sessions that could be designed experientially but in which achievement of the learning objectives would actually be enhanced by a slide presentaton and would likely be depressed if we worked with actual rugs. One of the best examples of this kind of session was pointed out to me by Wendel Swan. These are the sessions on structure that Marla Mallett presents. The projected images make clearer than examination of actual rugs ever could, many of the structural features she wants to make it possible for people to recognize and to distinguish. Such sessions can be organized in ways that are truly experiential (asking learners to apply resource materials in practicing recognitions of projected images of different structures) but in truth learning is advanced if the learners don't have to puzzle out the structural characteristics buried in the fabrics of real rugs. (That's a second level skill.) One of the reasons I have argued for a space on Turkotek where we can share good designs for rug meetings is that some may find it truly difficult to break away from the default lecture design that most of us apparently have driven deeply into our brains by the basic picture we saw during our general education (learning = someone standing in the front of the room talking). Steve has suggested that even unexpert folks can learn to give a useful talk. Certainly true, but I would hold that that's working on the wrong problem. The problem is how to provide learners with concrete experiences (of their own) in which they are likely to learn. Sorry to have gone on but this discussion set me off. Regards, R. John Howe |
| Subject | : | Learning, teaching, ACOR |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-27-2000 on 08:00 p.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear John, I disagree with your premise: "If learning is the objective of a rug meeting or presentation...", which leads to a number of ways of meeting that objective. ACOR and ICOC are neither meetings of academic professionals assembled to help each other amass the credentials that will support their hopes for tenure, nor is it the equivalent of an adult crash course in tapetology. It is esssentially a convention of hobbyists, sharing enthusiasms and opinions, enjoying their mutual admiration for terrific textiles, and, invariably, doing some learning along the way. In many respects it resembles a support group, in which we all are reassured by seeing our neurosis in other functional, well educated, generally respected and successful people. I disagree with the notion that, in your words, "Learning is an activity solely, exclusively of learners rather than of teachers. Yet whenever we want to produce learning we seem invariably to begin to plan teaching." I think of teaching as facilitating learning; it comforts me to believe that my professorin' and my students' education have a cause and effect relationship. One purpose a talk can have is to inform, which is a kind of teaching. But many talks are intended to persuade the audience of something, which is not the same thing as informing them; some are simply to entertain. It is neither immoral nor illegal to be entertained. That gets me to ruggies and what they like about ACOR. For the most part, I think it's the immersion in rugs, particularly their aesthetics and ethnography. The talks in which there are rugs to see usually draw and hold crowds. If someone put on a session about how to recognize a Shahsevan rug (to use your example), I think people will stay away in droves. They will put up with some session like that, where the basic thrust is to advance their education, but mostly people are at ACOR to have a good time and to see some great rugs. This is not to underestimate the problems attendant to bringing actual rugs to sessions and to letting the audience handle them. There are some real difficulties, but I think special efforts need to be made to resolve or minimize them. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Session Objective, Teaching and Learning, etc. |
| Author | : | R. John Howe |
| Date | : | 04-27-2000 on 10:09 p.m. |
| Hi Steve - I said nothing about what the objectives of ACOR or one of its sessions or of any rug session should be. I would certainly agree that meeting designs should be aimed at achieving the particular objectives adopted for that particular meeting. My experience though suggests that both participants and leaders of rug meetings often have fairly serious learning objectives in mind. The person who prepares and presents a sound, well-organized lecture learns far more than those who listen to it. The lecture fosters learning but most intensely in the wrong target population. If one simply wants to look at some great material, that is a design the difficulty of which centers primarily on some species of selection and gathering. Your seemingly serious critique of my facetious "advanced" learning objective may indicate that your usual razor sharp sense of humor momentarily failed you. I was doing two things with the example, (1) seriously suggesting (without recommending the objective mentioned for a moment) that very difficult, technical distinctions can be dealt with usefully with such a design and (2) having a little fun with Mike, whom I saw was active in the conversation. About the relationship between teaching and learning I suspect that we do disagree fairly seriously. I, for example, would would distinguish "facilitating" quite sharply from "teaching." Our differences here are to be expected since you are a teacher and I have devoted my professional life to fostering learning, especially in job settings. But that goes in directions outside the scope not only of Jerry's salon but even of Turkotek more generally. Regards, R. John Howe |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | Steve Price |
| Date | : | 04-28-2000 on 06:47 a.m. |
| sprice@hsc.vcu.edu Dear John, The topic you raised is how to define the best format a presentation should take if its objective is to promote learning by the audience, without, of course, saying that this would be an objective for an ACOR presentation (according to your last message). I'm content to leave that subject right where it is, although I happen to believe that it is an important one to conference organizers and its answer will have a great impact on conference attendance. I am, frankly, astonished and somewhat offended by one point you raise, though: Our differences here are to be expected since you are a teacher and I have devoted my professional life to fostering learning... I believe I speak for professors everywhere with the following response: 1. There is a difference between a professor and a teacher, and that difference is usually among the reasons most professors didn't become teachers. 2. Professors and teachers have a number of things in common. One of them is that all teachers and many professors devote their professional lives to fostering learning. Most of us recognize that there are other people out here who do so as well. Steve Price |
| Subject | : | RE:Repeat lecture sessions? |
| Author | : | R. John Howe |
| Date | : | 05-01-2000 on 01:57 p.m. |
| Hi Steve - Only looked again at this thread just now. Had assume it had run its course. I meant nothing disrespectful, of course. I was merely holding firm to my original claim that teaching (regardless of whether it is done by teachers or professors) is distinctive from learning. I am clear that you are convinced of the efficacy of teaching and have seen you devote considerable care to it. I was merely saying that I do not indulge in teaching much but rather focus on producing learner experiences that seem likely to produce the desired learning. A different thing. I would also hold that the cause-effect relationship that most teachers assume between their teaching and whatever student learning occurs is questionable and needs to be demonstrated with data that focuses not just on student performance as an indicator of what the student has done but student performance in the aggregate as an indicator of whether the teaching has been efficious in achieving the learning objectives. I have not examined evaluation systems in the university world recently but have the impression that they do not yet take this latter focus. But now we are far, far from rugs and Turkotek. Regards, R. John Howe |