When: Monday, October 8, 4-5 pm
Where: Gould Library Athenaeum
This coming Monday, Professor Andrew Elfenbein of the University of Minnesota will be presenting a talk in the Athenaeum entitled “When the Medium Isn’t the Message.” Professor Elfenbein’s research and teaching interests run the gamut from eighteenth- and nineteenth-century British literature and the history of authorship to queer theory and cognitive approaches to literacy. In his upcoming talk, he explores the relation between reading and the physical object being read. Professor Elfenbein graciously agreed to answer some questions for the Miscellany, and you can read his responses below!
Your latest book, The Gist of Reading, introduces frameworks from cognitive psychology to extend the critical discourse around reading. Have any insights from the science of reading influenced the way you teach students literature and how to approach it? Are there ways by which English pedagogy can respond meaningfully to the empirical findings? What methods can readers and students employ to engage more consciously with literature?
In the classroom, an understanding of cognitive load has been extremely helpful: there is only so much that anyone can do at one time. This understanding has made me a much more patient teacher! I also have been privileged to work with an exceptional group of educational psychologists at the university, and their work has stressed the importance of alignment (clarifying course outcomes, and then making sure that reading materials, in-class activities, and assessment assignments all align with those outcomes).
In terms of conscious engagement: one of the most helpful is to articulate a goal for yourself when you are reading. Having such a goal can help you filter out what is more important (for you) and what is less important, and such filtering allows you to read more effectively.
How has your interest in linguistics contributed to the questions you sought to answer with your book’s inquiry?
Many psychologists who work on reading see themselves as psycholinguists, so definitely yes. Good psycholinguistic work has shown how what seem like very small differences in wording can have significant effects how readers respond to texts.
You’ve recently discussed writing’s power to deceive and our climate of fake news, necessitating readers’ scrutiny and skepticism as much as ever. Do you see a similar ethical obligation for readers of fiction?
I do not because fiction does not make the same truth claims as news, and readers, in general, have different expectations for news and for fiction. An interesting finding is that readers are much less susceptible to believing false facts when they are embedded in works that have “otherworldly” settings, like science fiction. Moreover, readers tend to exercise more conscious choice when reading a long work of fiction and are likely to be more aware of what experience they may be choosing.
How do you see the ubiquity of digital texts as having changed the way we read?
This is the subject of my talk, so come to it to find out!
***
We at the Miscellany heartily echo that final sentiment, and we hope to see you there!