R4: A Review of Sorts

I found Tinsberg to be my favorite instructor (besides the author of that first text we read!); he had a very clear and concise way of laying things out.  He captured the essence of nearly every instructor’s plight in a simple yet rigorous plan.  He had consistent expectations like the two drafts per assignment and very well-thought out assignments that are reflected in his student objectives.  He knows he needs to empower students through language study, retooling writing skills, and adhering to the process.  I loved his Essay of Belief/radio assignment that he uses to specifically let students realize “their ideas matter.”  I find his Essay of Application very relevant and applicable, while also thoroughly thought out and structured.  Though other instructors have mentioned the writer’s memo, I like his simple explanation and 3 questions that frame all memos.  Tinsberg offered not only great ideas for curriculum design, but the philosophical approach to Writing instruction.

 

I found Villanueva’s writing interesting, relevant, and easy to follow; but relative the wealth of notes I took from Tinsberg’s chapter, I took very little for Villanueva’s chapter as little was new to me and I was still relating everything back to Tinsberg. That being said, he discussed writing instruction in a way that confirmed some of my thoughts, but did not make me think of anything new.

 

Wardle and Downs reiterate the Writing about Writing approach that was previously mentioned and little elaborated.  Like with Villanueva, I didn’t feel anything profoundly new was offered, but some of their philosophies and explanations were helpful.  I appreciated their definition of writing and some of the requirements of developing authentic writing tasks.  I like their explanation of learning through writing versus societal beliefs of simply “recording information.”  I especially like their explanation of what E101 is – they describe it as a beginning of a vertical writing journey that continues beyond the course, presumably lifelong.  I admittedly did not like their tandem writing in the last several pages – I continually wished they had cut back on the back-and-forth; it was refreshing at first, but then became tired and cumbersome.

 

As with the last two, I felt Yancey was not offering many fresh ideas, but reiterating previous practices of other instructors (I know they can’t help where editors decided to sequence their chapters, but as a reader, my interest waned.  Yancey did provide some interesting information about 3 tendencies that influence FYC curricula: WPA outcomes, Framework for Success in College Writing, and the local campus initiatives for FYC.  She makes an interesting point about the evolution of facts as it relates to writing “correctly”; what we do today, may be found out to be false or partially false down the road, but we still have to follow some procedure and framework.  Since writing is largely rooted within society, there is an expectation of its evolution as society evolves (or perhaps writing is the causation of societal evolution!)   Nonetheless, she reminds us to be open minded ourselves.

 

I also liked Yancey’s assignment “Composition-in-Three-Genres”.  It was mentioned previously, but I like her set-up and explanation of the assignment; an adapted version will find its way into my course.

 

Please excuse my structure for this response; I just felt like reviewing each chapter.

 

Lastly, I want to thank everyone again for the wonderful examples/models of curricula  from which I will be perfecting my own curriculum and for the wonderful feedback.  Despite my own disappointment due to doubting E110 implementation any time soon at my school, I am very grateful to be working with such an efficient group; your energy is contagious and you really propel me to hone my own talents and perfect my E110 curriculum.  Thank you!

R3: Theme for Composition (B?)

“The instructor said,

Go home and write
a page tonight.
And let that page come out of you—
Then, it will be true.”

-Langston Hughes, “Theme for English B”

Langston’s first assignment for English B (and his submission) seemed so idealistic to me.  A professor posing the same assignment to a class of 30 students would surely be lucky to get even 1 response like Langston’s (I thought).  But with a little more direction (“…a page tonight [about how powerful language can be].”) and a curriculum focused on a thematic inquiry , these results seem more realistic.  Bringing student experience and expertise to the center stage empowers, motivates, and refreshes students to excel in life (and composition class)!

As we near the development of our own courses, I am relieved to realize the variety of directions, topics, and personalities encountered in exploring the instruction of Composition in FYC chapters 5-8.  It is refreshing to read about the value of individuality at the collegiate level when uniformity is all the rave at the high school level.  That isn’t to say I’m inspired to jump ship, but I’m inspired to right my own ship.

Mere teachers  can’t change policies that dictate our profession, but we can modify our curricula to foster individuality.  The more we read, it becomes increasingly apparent that what experience or expertise students individually possess are the foundation of course content.  The failure of our education system lies in the muting of such uniqueness in favor of prescriptive methods, general conformity, and strict adherence to the literary canon.

By allowing (and even encouraging) students to discuss personally relevant topics (sometimes even in their native language which may completely ignore conventions of SWE), we are providing ownership, value, purpose, and ultimately intrinsic motivation to improve writing (or expand writing repertoire).  In fact, many of these instructors suggest an even “tighter” focus on individual experience with language and composition to provide for individuality, but still a certain commonality and relevance to keep class discussion (both in class and online) based on composition in a cohesive context.  In other words, composition instructors need to provide a united curriculum that is thematically focused on linguistics yet still provides students with opportunities to talk about their experiences.

Having read the work of 9 experienced composition instructors and being exposed to even more through their references, planning around a central theme related to language and linguistics seems the most crucial decision in the entire planning process.  Most instructors describe their starting point as an overarching theme or question.  No matter what they called it, they started at a concept broad enough to provide many decisions to students and focused enough to ensure resulting work would be similar and rooted in linguistics/composition.

In reflecting on my own college experience, I am most appreciative of my professors who adhered to this school of thought; by involving myself with the content of the course, I became a stakeholder in the course not only for a grade, but for my role in helping evolve the course/subject and providing my own content to help others learn (and likewise learning from the content created by other peers).  Having this realization and reflection, I plan to adapt this practice for my own instruction of Composition and likely any other aspects of writing instruction outside of my Composition course(s).

 

FOOD FOR THOUGHT:

• Mathieu offered a great framework/hierarchy for assignments.  I really appreciate her point about the relevance of what I keep referring to as a thematic focus – she says the writing in the course will improve grasp of thematic inquiry, and thematic inquiry will improve writing – that is a valuable point to realize to commit to such a thematic approach to planning this course.
• I really valued Redd’s discussion on Rubric Assessment. I find many teachers rely on rubrics for ease of commenting, but Redd makes many good points about grading consistently and providing clear expectations.
• Reid was great.  I honestly never understood his point about Actor-Networks and Assemblages (194-195) because it was a moment of serious text complexity, but he made great points about writing in the public domain (as we are for E688) and his grading process.  I also love his analogy of composition instruction as a fitness trainer developing a workout program that clients need to use appropriately to garner expected results.  And lastly, he makes an excellent point about problems in education as a result of developing education from the context of the 19th and 20th century industry and institution as opposed to the reasons for and the means of how the context of those times resulted.  That’s a really deep realization which could (should) turn the entire field of education upside down.
• I appreciate Shipka’s delineation of writing and composition.

R2 – Pondering Portfolios (and a few other things)

“First-Year Composition usually teaches the equivalent of “general ball-handling skills” that are largely ineffective for playing specific sports.”

-David Russell

The quote from Anson’s Chapter “Writing, Language, and Literacy” frames the problem each professor of Composition attempts to address in our text. In reading these first four chapters, the subjectivity of writing, writing instruction, writing assessment, and reading (something I formerly painted as a challenge for the ELA instructor) is realized as a benefit; a benefit that nonetheless clouds course transparency, assessment, and expectation, unless of course it is considered when structuring the course. By realizing the subjective nature of writing and writing instruction as a benefit, we can welcome variations of non-standard English, student culture, and student expectations. An invite we may come to regret when actually in the trenches, but one that clearly benefits students’ psyche and ultimate writing ability.  So how can we accept and nurture every student from every background exihibiting a range of ability without driving ourselves crazy?

The answer isn’t easy and is even less easy to actually implement, but there is an answer!  Of the 4 chapters we were assigned, Inoue’s “A Grade-Less…” was the most intriguing and I will likely adapt most strategies from his course, but he didn’t have the answer. I found the other chapters not nearly as beneficial as Inoue’s chapter, but they did delve into a commonality mentioned through three of the four courses (Inoue actually doesn’t mention it) that I propose as the answer: Portfolios.  Portfolios in my future Composition class have not been defined, but I know I will include that component.

Anson’s portfolio was designed to alleviate stress and ensure authentic passage through the writing process. He allows students to select and refine personal writing pieces from the entire semester for inclusion in their final portfolio. Anson has genre expectations, but otherwise provides students with a lot of choice and a lot of time for completing their portfolios. I love the idea of students revisiting writing pieces of their choice for refinement, rather than assigning a high-stakes essay that is due a week later.

Though I admittedly did not like Canagarajah’s Chapter 2 “ESL Composition…”, I agree with one of his major principles and appreciate his perspective on portfolios. We tend to view ESL students as “lacking intelligence,” when fluency is actually the issue. Sure some ESL students lack intelligence just as regular ed students do, but viewing their problem as an opportunity is more beneficial. Canagarajah describes an ESL students relationship with the English language not as a missing piece, but as an expansion of repertoire. ESL students possess rich language skills and simply need to possess a better understanding of English to improve in English composition. Holding these students to standards of perfection will only deepen their conflict with the language.  Though I do digress, portfolios also address these concerns in giving ESL students low-stress opportunities to exert effort to improve their writing.

Beyond the philosophical benefits of portfolios in the ESL classroom, Canagarajah discusses the uses of an online electronic portfolio. Very similar to our own WordPress class site, Canagarajah promotes online sharing of work to maximize feedback/exposure to the writing of others and the online compiling of work to see student writing evolve – the resulting electronic portfolio is more likely to live on beyond the class and is more widely accessible than any other medium. The portfolio system I use in my Composition class will be online, though I have not decided on a specific medium.

Lastly, Hesse’s Chapter 3, “Occasions…” offered many beneficial philosophies of teaching writing while also defining his use of and experience with portfolios. I found his course organization to be simple yet logical and appropriate. As we will be morphing a 1-semester college course into a 2-semester high school course, it is tempting to pursue the 4 phases of his course to fit into our 4 marking periods. He has students in his composition class progress through phase 1 (reading and writing exercises on a common focus), phase 2 (similar work as phase 1, but now on a relevant but individual topic), phase 3 (re-purposing earlier writing), and phase 4 (the portfolio phase). Hesse structures his portfolio phase to provide students with time and choice, while creatively offering them vouchers for written feedback on one draft of their choice, a promised 15-minute office consultation on another piece, and a 15-minute classroom workshop for the third piece. He requires 3 writing pieces for the portfolio and provides students with choice throughout the entire process.

Returning to Inoue, I find the portfolio incredibly applicable for the “Grade-Less” composition course because he grades based on a perceived effort in accordance to a common grading policy that is made by the class as a class.  Inoue describes some elements of portfolios without using the word “portfolio”; his philosophies perfectly align with a portfolio component.  His grading of pereceived effort is more than just watching students and judging effort by comparing drafts; he has students write labor journals and constantly engage in discussions of and about the processes they all follow.  By bringing light to these processes, you glamourize it and motivate students through what they could possibly learn rather than what grade they could possibly earn.  A portfolio fits wonderfully into this class as it could be structured in a way that illuminates the amount of labor exerted throughout the entire process of a writing piece.

Moving forward, I imagine myself returning to some of these very relevant and applicable writing assignments as I develop my own Composition curriculum.  The portfolio component of the composition instructor is clearly a valuable tool; alleviating student stress towards writing tasks, streamlining collection and compilation of work, and genuinely representing a student’s growth and progress towards becoming a better writer.  By emphasizing individual growth as opposed to societal benchmarks, writing instruction/assessment addresses the reality of the range of writing ability that exists in our society (and specifically our classes).  By implementing a portfolio component, this transformation of grading practices is much more feasible, transparent, and fair.

R1: The Power of Prewriting

In regards to the writing process, college writing instruction, and teacher-pupil interaction, I found the book very thorough.  I imagine the text will be a staple in the development of my own E110 curriculum and especially once I hit the trenches and begin applying practices (discussing student work daily, revising and not simply editing and proofreading, planning with writing in mind and not reading, to name a few).  However, I find the power of prewriting to be largely assumed (I like the sound of that too, so that’s what we’ll call the move, “The Power of Prewriting”).  In a course that traditionally occurs amidst the high school/college transition (and in our cases will illuminate what this transition may be like), I find it critical to ensure prewriting skills are possessed, valued, and revisited throughout the process.

 

With eroding standards and a hyper-focus on graduation rates, many students are unprepared for the transition into college.  According to the ACT’s “The Reality of College Readiness 2013” Report, only ¼ of the class of 2011 in America met all 4 College Readiness Benchmarks (http://www.act.org/readinessreality/13/pdf/Reality-of-College-Readiness-2013.pdf). 66% of Students met the English standard, but that still leaves a handful that potentially do not possess basic prewriting skills.  The Power of prewriting would be a topic well worth the investment and could, like the other prescribed moves, be revisited at any time in the writing process.

 

The text makes ample usage of the term “outlining” and refers back to its value on a few occasions, but doesn’t prescribe any method or application for prewriting.  Perhaps its value was lost in the tremendous value of the other moves, or safely assumed to be a part of process that occurs before any type of rewriting would even have a purpose.  I found the most relevant discussion to prewriting to be the excerpts from Stephen King and Charles Jordan: King in his description of the malady of writer’s block and potential solutions and Charles’ own process of reflecting, realizing and rethinking his entire approach to his essay.  Both, in some way, articulate the act of brainstorming.  The text also frequently makes reference to writing leading towards new writing; whether inspiration is found in one’s own writing or the writing of another, this type of writing is also stream of consciousness, much like a brainstorm.

 

I would define the “Power of Prewriting” as a 3 part move resulting in a solid plan to begin writing but also used/revised as a reference point to track revisions to the core of the essay.  Part 1 of the move is the actual brainstorming; the part involving synapses and neurons and stuff English teachers don’t understand.  This step is critical because you need to identify a genuine interest in the topic as well as a genuine purpose in discussing it; establishing both will help lead to ideas.  Part 2 involves the actual writing and organizing of the storm between the ears – there is value in chaos with brainstorming, but you still want to follow some organizational pattern to facilitate the transitions from brainstorm to outline to essay.  Part 2 purposely minimally suggests any means of organizing beyond the need to simply be organized (perhaps my own oversight of my own suggested move!).  And lastly, Part 3 involves the outlining and hierarchy of concepts.  Easier said than done, but align your purpose (project) to your line of thinking and try to roughly sketch out your points and supporting evidence/examples from the general to the specific, culminating in some new line of thinking or expected reader realization.  And though not a specific “part” in this move, the value of this prewriting continues on with the writing process as it can be used to restore an initial intent, track an essay’s evolution, or simply focus a writer’s efforts and direction.

 

My decision to select prewriting is largely influenced by the needs of my students; even the top achieving students have grown accustomed to cutting corners and relying on their natural intelligence to get them out of honest work.  As it was this past year with SAT scores from 1400-600 represented in all of my senior classes and an average of 33 seniors per class, instruction for prewriting was ignored and overlooked by top students.  With the advent of E110 in my school, I hope to restore some beneficial level of tracking to more appropriately educate my students based on their abilities.  As I will have to resort to the nuts and bolts of prewriting in some of my classes; hopefully I finally will be able to teach the value of prewriting for academic writing in a way that will appeal to my top students who feel they are already fully equipped with every ounce of academic knowledge they could ever possibly need.