The final three essays of First Year Composition offered both great insight and worthwhile assignments. To begin, I had felt strongly about Villaneuva’s “Oral Report” as a research assignment since it would enable students to examine a problem with language (as I had referenced in my last blog response); however after reading Yancey, I am quite torn. Her evidence-based assignment also has a unique spin on language and research as she has students analyze artifacts such as postcards, greeting cards, or any language-based item in order to create inquiry to then be solved by argument and evidence. I feel both have true value; however, I will most likely adopt the one which lends itself toward more variety and opportunity. I like the current-event aspect of Villaneuva’s Oral Report; however, Yancey’s assignment could really work on anything ranging from an old love letter found in the attic to pamphlet from a vacation.
In contrast to Yancey’s evidence-based assignment, I really appreciated her inquiry assignment which uniquely focuses solely on “thinking.” So often as an English teacher, I find myself rushing students to make claims and find evidence, which I mostly blame on Common Core; thus, leaving little time for a focus on “thinking.” Yancey really sold me on this after her example using World War II stating, “students who have been rewarded for claim and evidence for most of their K-12 testing lives now need not to claim, not to argue, but rather to inquire” (329). However, I would heed her caution that students could become so engaged in exploring that they only want to keep investigating, so it would be my role to nudge them to “stake their claim.” I wish she would have provided a better example of this assignment, as I really want to move forward with it. I plan on using it along with a previous idea involving Vietnam since she has already modeled its use with World War II.
Wardle and Downs had an abundance of great ideas; however, two ideas really resonated with me. First of all, their dialogue about the use of models validated so much of my existence as an English teacher (no exaggeration intended). Elizabeth cleverly described how she “backs into models” and how using them at the beginning of an assignment could close off students’ thinking. Doug really made me ecstatic when he discussed the way he answers a student concern for how an aspect of a piece should be: “I most often tell them, ‘I won’t know that for sure until I see what you all write…’”(289). It’s not that I don’t know how to respond to students, but hearing such qualified professors use the same responses I use at times with a splatter of self-doubt genuinely gave me reassurance that I am doing what’s best: making the students work hard enough to figure it out for themselves with just enough feedback along the way.
Last, I thought the debate on actual time spent writing in the classroom was splendid. Doug made his point that talking about writing does take time and the most writing can be completed outside of class. However, Elizabeth’s point that “I make sure that the writing happens in class as well as out of class, because I’m just not sure the students would try some of the things I want them to unless we do them together,” (294) really aligns with how I want to run my classroom. Then she goes on to talk about the discussions that occur about the in-class writing activities. This hit home with me as I already force my students to have discussions about discussions where we look at amount of participation, interruptions, side conversations, and a discussion map to decide how it could be better. This is metacognition at its best, and the thought of incorporating more discussions about in-class writing is simply thrilling.
Although I am thrilled to finally be afforded the time to finalize my own syllabus, I could not be more thankful for all of the insightful and engaging ideas I have garnered through these twelve essays. Now I just need to fit the pieces and fragments I plan to borrow and modify to my own puzzle of a syllabus for E110. These essays have really raised the bar, and if my course can live up to these, I know it will be a sure-fire success.
E688: Seminar in Teaching Composition 
Tim,
You’re clearly itching to get going on your course! Great—I’m eager as well to discuss it with you. But I do first want to note two excellent ideas that you raise here:
1) A writing course should include a lot of writing in class. That is, the work we do with students in class shouldn’t just be about writing, it should engage students in doing the actual work of writing—at least part of the time.
2) Similarly, a writing course doesn’t just “use” discussion—it teaches students how to discuss ideas and writing. Which means stopping from time to time to ask, so what did we just do here? how can we do it better?. I think such meta-discussions can often arise spontaneously—good teachers will see and seize the moments for them—but that you can also plan to make them happen, too.
Looking forward to our workshop next week!
Joe
I so agree that feeling confident that students can figure out their own thoughts without the teacher coming to “save” them is paramount. Writing is messy. It requires thinking that heads to dead ends or questions that can’t be answered until more research is done. Writing forces students to see the illogic in their thoughts or the lack of support. Struggling with these ideas is what makes writing so important. So many times students come to me and ask if their first paragraphs are good, and all I can respond to is the first paragraph. That is like determining the taste of a finished cake by looking at the broken eggs with the sugar. I want them to struggle with the ideas they see within them, to work through them until they are organized, connected, supported, and functioning as a finished whole. I feel as if my job is not to “correct” what is not clear per se, but to point out where more thought could be put into the ideas, where I do not understand clearly what they are saying, where they need to go deeper. Class discussions about ideas, peer editing that focuses on development of ideas, exercises that focus on critically thinking about ideas, sharing information about language of which they might have been unaware, providing mirrors from many directions allows students to open up, to explore new ways of expressing, to become engaged within their environments in ways they had never considered, but most importantly, to recognize the value of the audience and the power of communicating together.
Your idea about discussions about the discussions is an excellent classroom management skill and opportunity to address group dynamics, an important issue in the “real” world where people work in teams. I like that idea a lot and will be incorporating that one into my teaching skills. Discussing the discussions brings forth who is participating, who is not, how the discussion is led and grown into greater opportunities of thought, and most importantly, how sharing a simple idea with others can stimulate great thoughts. Students need to be comfortable with sharing what they believe and not being so concerned if it is “right.” Brainstorming is at its best here, and brainstorming opens the mind to possibilities not considered. I would love to hear more about how you create discussion maps and how the conversations go when you ask how the discussion could have been better. What a great way to model thinking within a group.