My E110 course employs the four modes of communication—speaking, listening, reading, and writing—in the process of composing as students study human progress as a metaphor for composition improvement. Assignments explore journeys, stewardship, technology, and leadership through inspection, reflection, and introspection. In order to present ideas with accuracy and detail, students follow the writing process with specific emphasis on revision, expanding and improving current and previously written pieces. Their writing grows just as humanity has grown. They will look into the past and the present as they explore how technology has changed humankind. Being globally aware twenty-first century citizens, the culminating assignment requires that students carefully analyze the Human Ecology piece and choose the most appropriate medium for publication given their unique audience.
Tag: E110
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!
Week 5: First Drafts and Workshop
Your first draft of the materials for your E110 course is due on Tuesday, 7/08, at 11:59 pm.
Here’s how I explain what I mean by a draft when I’m working with undergraduates:
A draft is an open and approximate version of the piece you want to write. It is not simply a set of notes, or an intro, or outline, or ideas toward an essay . . . Rather, it is an attempt to write the actual thing, the essay itself, even while knowing that you are not yet quite in a position to write that thing, that you still have more work to do.
An analogy might be to a sketch or study that an artist makes of a painting, or a demo that a musician makes of a song. The attempt in each case is to offer a sense of what the final version might look or sound like—even if all the details haven’t been worked out or filled in, and even if key parts of the piece are still open to change. I’m hesitant to use the metaphor of a rough draft, since that can suggest something hastily or sloppily done, but in a sense that is what you want to do—to rough out your essay, put together an approximate version of it as a whole, so that you can then later go back to reshape, develop, and refine it.
So that’s what I want you to try to do for next week—to create a first, working version of your essay, something that gets at what you think you want to say, but that is still open to change and revision.
Substitute course materials for essay, and you pretty much have your assignment for next week. But while I’d like you to begin to sketch out your course as whole—its writing projects, its readings, its basic shape and pace—I’d advise you not to get too lost in the weeds of scheduling and policy details. Focus instead on drafting a good version of an About section, in which you describe the aims of your course, and of a Plan in which you offer a quick sense of how the course will unfold over time—its narrative arc, as it were. And then see if you can list the main Writing assignments for the course. If you can come up with solid versions of those three sections, you’ll be off to a strong start in your planning.
You can refer to this website as a kind of template for your course, and you may also want to look at two other versions of E110 I taught last year, in the Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 semesters. I’m also attaching syllabi from my UD colleagues Christine Cucciarre and Stephanie Kerschbaum—who both do an excellent job, I think, of setting a friendly tone and rigorous set of expectations for the work they will be doing with students.
I will send the three of you an email with the subject line: First Drafts. When you’re ready, please hit Reply All and attach your course materials, saved as a single Word document. (Or if you’re working online, just send us a URL.) That way we will all have copies of one another’s work.
We will workshop your course materials on Wednesday, 7/09, from 2:30-4:30 pm, in my office at 134 Memorial. I think we will probably use all two hours. Please come with a print-out of all three drafts, and if at all possible, try to scan the materials posted by your colleagues. I’ll explain the form the workshop will take when we meet together.
Don’t hesitate to email me if you have any questions. I look forward to seeing how your plans for your courses take shape. Good luck!
E688: Seminar in Teaching Composition 