R4: Focusing on Meta-cognition and Diversity

Paula Mathieu proposes that a writing course must be focused on some open ended question that focuses discussions and exploration so that the experience of “searching” for answers can be broad enough to include many interests while also narrow enough to explore a small facet of the issue. I also agree that even with such focusing, her woes about “the reality of how insufficient it all seems” in a single semester is my reality too, even though I have a year to teach a curriculum (125). Never enough time seems to exist to cover everything, so great care must be taken as to what will be presented. Currently my focus in my Brit Lit survey class is the focus on the power of the word. The mid-term and final exams must answer the same question (only cover more material in the final): Trace through the literature we have studied from Anglo-Saxon to modern the changing conscious of humanity about one certain issue. I “preach” that the “word” always comes before the physical manifestation. Literature, I firmly believe, functions as a harbinger of what is coming as society grapples with current concerns. So my focus will be on the power of language, of the “word.”

I also concur that a college level writing class must make students comfortable with scholarly research, including primary sources, and so I like her idea of teaching interviewing for the sake of research. Primary research and library skills are imperative, but without the ability to ask good questions, no amount of research will develop good writing.  So having a meta-cognitive understanding of research helps students to consider “research” beyond the internet.  Lots of mental doors could open up in such conversations as interviews or through “created experiences” or primary sources, leading to lots of questions to research.

Yet, Teresa Redd insists that students must be able to do more than scholarly writing to feel comfortable with their own writing skills. I also agree. All writing in one form or another is research. Some is “lived experience,” some is “created experience” as Douglas Hesse suggests, and some is searching “textual and empirical research” on the same topic (53). Either way, writing is sharing what one has experienced, discovered, or understood. So a writing class must also allow for writing done for different audiences and purposes with different mediums. Ultimately, the one goal for me, as it is for Chris Anson, is for students to be able to think with a meta-consciousness about how to explore and discover knowledge, how to consider that knowledge from an overview (twisting and turning the facts to see new perspectives and be conscious that one is doing just that), and how to communicate that knowledge in such a way that it matches the audience.

Developing these skills covers all five of Redd’s goals in her writing classes: develop authority within one’s own voice that can adapt to any situation; understand the relationships in thinking between writing, reading and research; understand how to research effectively; understand relationships between purpose, audience, and medium; and learn how to use all technologies from pen and paper to digital (147-151). Redd also stresses, as does Asao Inoue, the need to include students as the assessors to help develop that sense of meta-cognition abut their own writing, but she mixes student assessments, portfolios, and summative statements with formative assessments using rubrics and personal conferences. I love the idea of having students read their own papers before a mark is on the paper to “hear” if their errors are from proofreading (because they self-check as they read) or from a lack of knowledge (errors go right past them). That student reading offers two opportunities to assess: what writing knowledge (grammar, syntax, vocabulary, etc) are they not understanding or what value lies in proofreading. Both are excellent indicators of need for improvement.

Redd’s formal assessments, like Mathieu’s, focus on “grading” the portfolios and self-assessments, which avoids hindering the “labor” of creation as Inoue fears if formal grades are placed on the writings that move towards a finished product.

My writing class will be focused on an interdisciplinary research focus, will use portfolios and student assessments, will cross mediums for different audiences and environments, and will focus on Redd’s five goals, for they are mine also.

An aside I would like to share is the sublime feeling of being part of this collegiate research world on the pedagogy of writing when seeing Joe Harris’ text Rewriting quoted and forwarded as an argument to further improve writing classes. So cool.

Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford. First Year Composition: From Theory to Practice. Parlor Press, 2014. Print.

Harris, Joseph. Rewriting: How To Do Things With Texts. U of Colorado, 2006. Print.

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.