Upon completion of the assigned reading, my head feels like it is spinning with ideas, strategies, and approaches to developing next year’s E110 course at Conrad Schools of Science. To be clear, the spinning is positive, but mildly overwhelming.
A shared technique (more specifically, a shared assignment) that appeared in both Anson’s and Canagarajah’s proposed First-Year Comp courses is the literacy autobiography writing assignment. I was particularly intrigued by this technique since, to kick off the school year for the past 2 years, I have asked my students to read “How I Learned to Read and Write” by Helen Keller, and (after discussing the reading) write their own story to illustrate how they learned to read and write. Many of the stories I’ve read sounded similar to those described in Anson’s chapter – stories that “tell about their literacy development in highly generalized ways” (FYC, 15); however, I have not in past years engaged the students in taking their essays to the next level after responding to feedback from peers and making recommended changes – revising their work. Further, Canagarajah takes this idea of the literacy autobiography to yet another level, as she challenges her students to find their own voices through a process that leads students from autobiography to autoethnography. While Canagarajah’s approach lends itself (through her own admission) to ESL students which is not the primary make-up of the students I will be teaching (at least next year), I found value in her assignment as students transform their writing (through revision) from narrative to argumentation (or some combination thereof). I appreciated the transformation of the text – perhaps a way to help students see what true revision can look like early in the course.
Speaking of revision, I noticed that each proposed syllabus focused heavily on the writing process, a technique critical in the success of the literacy autobiographies mentioned above and of course, critical throughout the course. A trend that included existence of consistent writing/feedback groups throughout the entire semester was pervasive, and one that I see as critical in any first-year comp course. Whether in Inoue’s “non-graded” class focused on labor or Hesse’s course focused on different types of writing, all of the course descriptions lead students from seeing their writing as a PRODUCT to seeing their writing as a PROCESS. My experience teaching high school students has proven that this is not an easy shift to make – I’m hopeful as we continue to explore the theories and proposed courses throughout FYC that this shift will seem more achievable.
E688: Seminar in Teaching Composition 