What a difference an open-ended challenge can make. Upon the invitation to challenge our instructions, every student rethought how to approach their argument. Did we agree with what we had been told to do? Or, on a greater scale, did we even understand what we were told to do? When we were no longer certain that what we had done was “true,” I know I struggled with putting together what the two books have in common. We assume the connections we make are valid until we have to question whether or not they hold anything in common but the font between their covers.

The discourse forced out by questioning an assignment far exceeds that of a closed prompt. In the French course in which I am currently enrolled, the writing and discourse is strictly controlled and as a result the intellectual aspect is seriously lacking. While our outlines were malleable and open, every part of our papers are predetermined and dictated, starting immediately at the outline. As a result, everyone wrote identical papers on nearly identical topics. The restrictions effectively asphyxiated any novel ideas and inspired cyclical text without thought. I guess seeing what open-ended freedom can unleash makes it a lot harder to think within the confines of a ridged design.