I think Wink's article is mostly important not for transforming students, but for transforming teachers (as she sort of implied). As teachers, it's our job to not only teach students, but to let them know why we're teaching what we are if they can't see the connection. Now, there's some leeway in that: "Why are reading this?" is a question that's important, but I think we need to use discretion in answering it. We've seen that sentiment in this class, specifically during the first couple of weeks when discussing why we teach certain works and don't teach others. It's important for us to have reasons for what we're teaching, even if they're as simple as "I like the themes," "It's a different genre than anything we've read," or "It's required by the district." Sometimes, though, it might be more beneficial to flip the question and see what the students' responses are--if not immediately, then when you're finished teaching whatever it is. Ask the students why we read what we did, or why we just did a grammar unit, etc. Those are good questions, and they show that students are (or aren't) making connections. I know I ask/ed myself "Why are we reading this?" after just about anything in Brit Lit 1 and 2 and American 1. A lot of that stuff is (in my humble opinion) beyond terrible, and even more beyond irrelevant. Teaching why we're teaching is a beneficial aspect to combating apathy, considering there are plenty of works you can assign that promote apathy at its greatest.