I like how Reid states the obvious: that writers need to write and that they will only become better if they want to do so. My expectation is that any of my students who enroll in the class will fit the bill when it comes to improving. They know that the course will require a great deal of work and that they need to be willing participants. Reid’s how questions that lead to understanding of rhetoric make very good sense to me. I’d like to adopt that process, in addition to his emphasis on teaching digital rhetoric. The digital aspect of the course seems so important to me, especially when it comes to identifying the influence various media create, which leads me to Shipka’s course. Her emphasis on how language and media can be used differently to influence reminds me of an assignment that our eleventh graders complete. That task would work well as a springboard into a more in-depth piece about the power of media and vocabulary. I foresee a project that requires both research to find data supporting the effectiveness of advertisements, as well a an assignment centered around rewriting and communicating the same message to a host of different audiences. This develops essential critical thinking skills, which align with our Middle States goals.
Finally, Tinberg’s course seems very straightforward to me. I finally came across goals that mesh with my philosophy of developing both academic and work-related writing. It is founded on students’ knowing the importance of purpose, employing the writing process, and providing substantial evidence and elaboration. These are a natural progression of our current program, and students would find great success building these strengths. Two of Tinberg’s assignments intrigue me, too: the essay of application and the proposal. The application appeals because of its practicality, and I truly value realistic, applied composition. Students must develop an understanding of the everyday employment of writing as opposed the assignment style pieces to which they have become accustomed. The proposal also interests me, but I would tweak it to involve research. Students would not only write a proposal, but they would also provide researched evidence to define the problem and researched possible solutions to improve the situation, if not eradicate the problem.
As I read through First Year Composition: From Theory to Practice, I am forming a sharper picture of what will comprise my course. I am looking for a thematic mix of academic and work-related pieces that require a strong sense of audience and purpose. My writers will employ the writing process, write frequently, edit and revise, remediate, and reflect to revise again. To me, the best revision happens well after the piece is completed. Students become more critical of their work after they have grown, so an assignment written one or two months prior is the perfect canvas for revision.
E688: Seminar in Teaching Composition 
I also like Shipka’s “assignment centered around rewriting and communicating the same message to a host of different audiences” and have “stolen” that assignment for my curriculum (all “borrowed” lesson plans will be cited in my syllabus). I love the critical thinking that it generates about language. Tinberg’s straightforwardness was refreshing. His assignments are clear and focused on developing critical thinking in a sequential manner: what I believe, How I see another (the profile), and what trends I see around me (the proposal), though I too would make this a research paper instead of just the proposal because just having an idea does not mean that the thinking is valid until the evidence is in. Finding that evidence requires research, whether mining one’s own memories or those of others, developing one’s own primary research methods, or searching through texts for empirical evidence.
I also agree that writing requires a purpose and an audience to have meaning; otherwise, we are listening to the sound of one hand clapping. So my class will be similar in methods: I will rely heavily on discussion of ideas generated from essays, YouTube, TedTalks, journals, authors’ commentaries about writing and more; development of questions and need to explore; lots of writing drafts or sequential writing assignments that lead to the larger exploration; peer editing (including myself); and a chance to revise often a piece that has lain dead somewhere (usually two months will do that), waiting for an autopsy and a reincarnation. At the end will be the portfolio with assignments, drafts, peer editing comments, “final” papers and projects (particularly one working with digital creations), and self-assessment letters.
I too will also have a thematic focus, which will be around the power of language and the word. Our classes seem as if they might align well.
I, too, thought the proposal was a worthwhile assignment which I would like to implement within my own class. However, to extend your response even further, I would like to incorporate the common theme in so many of the essays about issues with language. For example, Villanueva presents in Assignment(s) 3 and 4 a background where “A recent item on NPR described a study in which 40% of all fourth graders studied displayed substandard reading” (270). Instead of just writing a proposal for some cliché school or community problem, students would have to find a language-related issue.
Villanueva also offers up specific ideas for such language-related problems in his Oral Report which students complete as a group presentation; however, I believe the topics he presents would be a good start for brainstorming for a “Language-based” proposal assignment. For instance, he lists “English Only/Official English” as one of the issues, and although this may seem broad, students could really hone in on “a proposal addressing a serious but solvable language problem in your community” (244).
I would foresee this beginning as a brainstorming discussion, and students might bring up ideas as simple as the overuse of the word “like” or perhaps local dialect. However, no matter course the project would take, students would engaged in metacognition and analysis to write their language proposal, and according to just about ever essay in First Year Composition, getting students to write, analyze, and engage in metacognition about rhetoric is really the central focus of any successful endeavor in a first year composition class.
Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford, eds. First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice. Parlor Press, 2014. Print.
Focusing a proposal on language issues is an excellent idea, particularly with current politics of the social media, immigration, official language use, propaganda, and more. Having young minds consider these concerns will prepare them for the big issues in the world beyond school. I am so glad you also are focusing on helping students “analyze and engage in meta-cognition about rhetoric,” so no matter how or where or what theme is taught in the writing class, the focus will be done well.
Dear Mary,
Okay, so now I’m getting annoyed at WordPress. I wrote a bunch of comments on Wednesday, and thought I had posted them, but now I’ve discovered that they seemed to have vanished, literally, into the ether!
But I recall writing to you with two ideas:
1) In terms of having students do some sort of meaningful digital writing—have you considered asking students to participate in a blog discussion like this one, on WordPress or some other platform? (Would that be technically possible?) What I like about this sort of assignment is that it remains firmly centered in writing—that is, you’re not asking students to make videos, or anything—but shifts attention from the page to the screen.
2) I love the idea of “delayed revision”! I’d like to hear more next week about how you will actually do it—that is, how you’ll fit a revision of a piece students wrote several weeks before into the “arc” of your course.
I look forward to meeting you and working with your course next week!
Joe