Aaaaaahhhhhhh
My last post! I can hardly believe it! Even though I'm working slightly ahead and am actually writing this on the eve of our gratuitous holiday, I am thinking in terms of winter break. How wonderful is it to have a whole month to devote to reading, writing, and watching your favorite movies over and over again? Since I am so ready for the break, I thought I might write about the specific things I plan o doing over the holiday.
First of all, my favorite, favorite thing to do is to watch Pride and Prejudice. (Only the A&E version, of course.) This film is the best adaptation of any book I think that I have ever seen and there is nothing better than having no kids (because their break starts after mine!) and the prospect of at least four hours of Lizzie and Mr. Darcy ahead of me. This actually became tradition for me when I quit smoking several years ago, and I return to it every year. It feels like therapy.
The next thing on my list is a new one. I am actually going to revise one of my short stories from about eight years ago. I have never been a faithful rewriter; I think I was a little bit daunted by the permanency of the written word. However, with all of these composition classes, I have begun to think of my writings as much more malleable, and I am quite excited by the prospect of returning to this story. I wrote it one afternoon when I worked at the Aiken Museum and everyone who has ever read it really liked it and thought it quite funny, but I've always tended to think of it as rather simplistic. Now, though, I am thinking in terms of the skeletal story, which is good, and my own ability to manipulate it.
Merry Christmas!
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Chapter 14
Summary:
Lindeman begins by describing some of the popular ways of evaluating student work-- namely, standardized testing. She comments on the fact that the people who have instituted these tests really are trying to help the educational system, albeit in a roundabout way. This section also describes the CCCC's goals for evaluating student work, which are more in-depth and thoughtful than the more traditional testing method.
The next section of this chapter focuses on Shaughnessy's method of diagnostically reading student's papers. This is a very useful and practical way for teachers to judge their student's writing, while still helping them to actually become better writers. This system requires that teachers note the types of common errors their students may use, as well as why they might make these errors. Diagnostic reading assumes that errors occur logically and deliberately and that a careful evaluator can help begin the process of reteaching that logic.
The rest of the chapter mostly discusses the most effective way to use comments for teaching writing at the drafting level. There are specific steps given that can be beneficial to teachers using this method.
Response:
My favorite part of this chapter was the section on comments. I have never really thought about how much a teachers comments can either help or hurt their student's writing. The attitude of the student is also discussed through the long example of the frustrated fragger. I have often felt this way when I have gotten my own papers back. In fact, I had a teacher once who I really, really loved. We had a close relationship and I loved her class. She thought I was a great writer and I always received A's on anything that I wrote for her, but the paper would still come back covered in spidery, indecipherable code. I never looked up those abbreviations and I never asked her what all of those marks might mean; I simply took my A and rolled on. Yet looking back, I see that I was shortchanged in a way because this teacher could have helped me to become a much better writer instead of allowing me to remain stagnated.
Lindeman begins by describing some of the popular ways of evaluating student work-- namely, standardized testing. She comments on the fact that the people who have instituted these tests really are trying to help the educational system, albeit in a roundabout way. This section also describes the CCCC's goals for evaluating student work, which are more in-depth and thoughtful than the more traditional testing method.
The next section of this chapter focuses on Shaughnessy's method of diagnostically reading student's papers. This is a very useful and practical way for teachers to judge their student's writing, while still helping them to actually become better writers. This system requires that teachers note the types of common errors their students may use, as well as why they might make these errors. Diagnostic reading assumes that errors occur logically and deliberately and that a careful evaluator can help begin the process of reteaching that logic.
The rest of the chapter mostly discusses the most effective way to use comments for teaching writing at the drafting level. There are specific steps given that can be beneficial to teachers using this method.
Response:
My favorite part of this chapter was the section on comments. I have never really thought about how much a teachers comments can either help or hurt their student's writing. The attitude of the student is also discussed through the long example of the frustrated fragger. I have often felt this way when I have gotten my own papers back. In fact, I had a teacher once who I really, really loved. We had a close relationship and I loved her class. She thought I was a great writer and I always received A's on anything that I wrote for her, but the paper would still come back covered in spidery, indecipherable code. I never looked up those abbreviations and I never asked her what all of those marks might mean; I simply took my A and rolled on. Yet looking back, I see that I was shortchanged in a way because this teacher could have helped me to become a much better writer instead of allowing me to remain stagnated.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Comments on Writing
I really like it when teachers give a lot of feedback on anything that I write. Of course, it is always nice to have good comments on papers, but writing well is definitely a process (one that I suppose will never end) and teachers are in a position to help that process along.
The most effective things that teachers can do is to address all aspects of the piece. I always wonder if there was something that I was not sure about and the teacher says nothing about it. Does that mean that I did it right? Does that mean that the teacher just didn't notice? I want to know about the organization, errors, and themes. I spend a lot of time considering all of these elements while I am writing, so it only seems fair that the instructor spend some time addressing these things. I don't really know that I ever get enough feedback to improve my writing. One thing I know I never hear is praise for any strengths that I may have in my writing. Teachers never tell you that.
Something that absolutely drives me crazy is if there is nothing on the paper but a grade. I also really don't like teachers using check marks for errors. It's confusing! I guess all in all teachers don't really comment on my papers because they spend more time on students that need more help. If you are a "good writer", it seems like you get to a point where you are pretty much on your own.
The most effective things that teachers can do is to address all aspects of the piece. I always wonder if there was something that I was not sure about and the teacher says nothing about it. Does that mean that I did it right? Does that mean that the teacher just didn't notice? I want to know about the organization, errors, and themes. I spend a lot of time considering all of these elements while I am writing, so it only seems fair that the instructor spend some time addressing these things. I don't really know that I ever get enough feedback to improve my writing. One thing I know I never hear is praise for any strengths that I may have in my writing. Teachers never tell you that.
Something that absolutely drives me crazy is if there is nothing on the paper but a grade. I also really don't like teachers using check marks for errors. It's confusing! I guess all in all teachers don't really comment on my papers because they spend more time on students that need more help. If you are a "good writer", it seems like you get to a point where you are pretty much on your own.
Non-Native English Speakers
Whenever someone is trying to learn a new language, there are difficulties because language is so difficult. The best way to approach learning a new language, I would think, is specific practice with real-world applications in the fundamentals of that language. Unfortunately, the public school system is fumbling to meet even the most basic needs, so the students are often thrown into a mainstream class and expected to come up to speed.
These students do have several things in their favor. Since they are already in the process of learning the new language, their consciousness is being brought to the structural level of that language. On the flip side, they are often unaware of the little nuances that make language so strange and difficult. If the students have reached the typical grade level for which they are meant, the struggles will be less pronounced simply because they have an understanding of the academic expectations.
On the other hand, there are students whose education may have been interrupted for any number of reasons. These students still have a lot in their favor, if the school system can adjust programs to meet their individual needs. One teacher would be unable to do everything that these students will need to be successful in their academic career. The most important thing for these students is a cohesive faculty with lots of support from every department.
These students do have several things in their favor. Since they are already in the process of learning the new language, their consciousness is being brought to the structural level of that language. On the flip side, they are often unaware of the little nuances that make language so strange and difficult. If the students have reached the typical grade level for which they are meant, the struggles will be less pronounced simply because they have an understanding of the academic expectations.
On the other hand, there are students whose education may have been interrupted for any number of reasons. These students still have a lot in their favor, if the school system can adjust programs to meet their individual needs. One teacher would be unable to do everything that these students will need to be successful in their academic career. The most important thing for these students is a cohesive faculty with lots of support from every department.
Sunday, November 11, 2007
Drafting
Summary:
Muriel Harris begins her article with descriptions of different types of writers. She specifically addresses experienced writers, because she doesn't want to confuse her study with those types of one-draft writers who do so because of procrastination. Harris also acknowledges that most writers fall somewhere in the place in-between the extremes. Eventually, she moves on to her study, which tries to make some broad generalizations about the behavioral differences of one- or multi-drafters.
The first difference which is noted is that of the starting point of both groups of writers. The one-drafters like to start with a specific focus, their topic well understood. The multi-drafters write at first to develop the topic. The next item of discussion is the way in which the writers make choices. The one-drafters may have a couple of options, but they quickly focus in and move on. The multi-drafters have the tendency to write out their options with the expectation of rejecting much of what they write. One drafters like to finish and be completely done with the assignment, while the multi's are never finished. Writing is more akin to thinking for these students. The final difference which Harris notes is perhaps the most important one. The one-drafters write for an audience, while the multi-drafters write for themselves.
Response:
I am really intrigued by the writing process and how differently everyone approaches it. I have always considered myself a multi-drafter because I write so much that I eventually don't use. However, when the word "tedious" was connected with the one-draft group, I felt a kinship.
I believe that the biggest difference between the two types of composers is that the one-drafters use their mind to think, while using the page to write. The multi-drafters use the page to think, and their revisions to write.
I am unsure of what this really means in a writing course, since certain criteria (like revision) must be taught whether or not everyone is comfortable with it. These students were extremes of both examples, so the one-drafters really did not need to revise very often. Most people are somewhere in the middle, though, and need as much practice as they can get. The study seemed to point more towards psychological and cognitive differences than actual writing styles.
Muriel Harris begins her article with descriptions of different types of writers. She specifically addresses experienced writers, because she doesn't want to confuse her study with those types of one-draft writers who do so because of procrastination. Harris also acknowledges that most writers fall somewhere in the place in-between the extremes. Eventually, she moves on to her study, which tries to make some broad generalizations about the behavioral differences of one- or multi-drafters.
The first difference which is noted is that of the starting point of both groups of writers. The one-drafters like to start with a specific focus, their topic well understood. The multi-drafters write at first to develop the topic. The next item of discussion is the way in which the writers make choices. The one-drafters may have a couple of options, but they quickly focus in and move on. The multi-drafters have the tendency to write out their options with the expectation of rejecting much of what they write. One drafters like to finish and be completely done with the assignment, while the multi's are never finished. Writing is more akin to thinking for these students. The final difference which Harris notes is perhaps the most important one. The one-drafters write for an audience, while the multi-drafters write for themselves.
Response:
I am really intrigued by the writing process and how differently everyone approaches it. I have always considered myself a multi-drafter because I write so much that I eventually don't use. However, when the word "tedious" was connected with the one-draft group, I felt a kinship.
I believe that the biggest difference between the two types of composers is that the one-drafters use their mind to think, while using the page to write. The multi-drafters use the page to think, and their revisions to write.
I am unsure of what this really means in a writing course, since certain criteria (like revision) must be taught whether or not everyone is comfortable with it. These students were extremes of both examples, so the one-drafters really did not need to revise very often. Most people are somewhere in the middle, though, and need as much practice as they can get. The study seemed to point more towards psychological and cognitive differences than actual writing styles.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
Revsions
I would have to say that I probably revise everything that I write at least twice, but usually three times. If the paper is a creative writing, I revise with an eye more toward content and overall form. If the piece is expository in nature, I read and revise mostly organizational components.
However, since I have been inundated with composition theory this semester, I have noticed a trend in my writing toward more in-depth revision. I don't think that I necessarily go through more drafts, but I think about that process much more deliberately. I have begun to look for things like paragraph structure more closely, as well as style components of my actual sentences. I have been reading Style by Joseph Williams and he harps on the old-new contract, parallel constructions, and balanced phrasing. Erika Lindeman's writings on paragraphs and sentences have furthered the attention to detail. Also, my own work on grammar education has led me to think about the smaller parts of my writing and how they may fit together as a whole.
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Teaching about Words
Summary:
Lindeman is discussing the importance of understanding words as transient rather than static in this chapter. If students come to their writing with a fear of choosing the wrong word or form, their writing is likely to be confusing and filled with inconsistencies. She suggests the importance of helping students become more comfortable in talking about their own language and being able to see their own writing as a living thing. There are several ways that the author says this can be accomplished is lots of classroom practice and discussion about such topics as parts of speech, effectively using active and passive voice, recognizing inflectional and derivational suffixes, and viewing style as word choice.
Response:
Lindeman does a great job in every chapter of reinforcing the idea that students are just as gifted in language as the instructor. The responsibility, then, lies with the instructor to help them view their language as something that can be changed from speech to the more conventional edited American English. There is also the idea that the more language is discussed, the better students become at writing for different audiences and making choices about style. I also liked the part about using nonsensical words to illustrate the systematic nature of inflectional suffixes.
Lindeman points out that while textbooks can be useful tools, the best way to help students become more proficient in their own writing is to use their own writing. Some teachers may be reticent to do this because it takes the ball out of their own court and makes the classroom a bit more unpredictable, but the extra effort certainly gets the desired results.
Lindeman is discussing the importance of understanding words as transient rather than static in this chapter. If students come to their writing with a fear of choosing the wrong word or form, their writing is likely to be confusing and filled with inconsistencies. She suggests the importance of helping students become more comfortable in talking about their own language and being able to see their own writing as a living thing. There are several ways that the author says this can be accomplished is lots of classroom practice and discussion about such topics as parts of speech, effectively using active and passive voice, recognizing inflectional and derivational suffixes, and viewing style as word choice.
Response:
Lindeman does a great job in every chapter of reinforcing the idea that students are just as gifted in language as the instructor. The responsibility, then, lies with the instructor to help them view their language as something that can be changed from speech to the more conventional edited American English. There is also the idea that the more language is discussed, the better students become at writing for different audiences and making choices about style. I also liked the part about using nonsensical words to illustrate the systematic nature of inflectional suffixes.
Lindeman points out that while textbooks can be useful tools, the best way to help students become more proficient in their own writing is to use their own writing. Some teachers may be reticent to do this because it takes the ball out of their own court and makes the classroom a bit more unpredictable, but the extra effort certainly gets the desired results.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Paragraph Revision
Original:
1) One of the the most effective things that I saw in Prof. Law's teaching of the writing process was her use of "error logs".
2) When the students turn in the final draft, the teacher grades and comments on them for conceptual and mechanical flaws.
1) At that point, the students are given the opportunity for a revised grade only if they complete their error logs.
3) The student must look up every mistake in their handbook and copy the rule onto a piece of paper.
3) Then, they must rewrite the flawed sentence/word/idea and incorporate it into the revised paper.
Revised:
Students are also led through the revision process by using "error logs". When they turn in their final draft, the teacher grades and marks them for conceptual and mechanical flaws. At that point, the students are given the opportunity for a revised grade only if they complete their error logs. Each student must look up every mistake in their handbook and copy the rule onto a piece of paper along with the flawed sentence/ word/ idea. Finally, all revisions must be incorporated into the new draft.
1) One of the the most effective things that I saw in Prof. Law's teaching of the writing process was her use of "error logs".
2) When the students turn in the final draft, the teacher grades and comments on them for conceptual and mechanical flaws.
1) At that point, the students are given the opportunity for a revised grade only if they complete their error logs.
3) The student must look up every mistake in their handbook and copy the rule onto a piece of paper.
3) Then, they must rewrite the flawed sentence/word/idea and incorporate it into the revised paper.
Revised:
Students are also led through the revision process by using "error logs". When they turn in their final draft, the teacher grades and marks them for conceptual and mechanical flaws. At that point, the students are given the opportunity for a revised grade only if they complete their error logs. Each student must look up every mistake in their handbook and copy the rule onto a piece of paper along with the flawed sentence/ word/ idea. Finally, all revisions must be incorporated into the new draft.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Teaching Paragraphing
Summary:
Chapter nine is one in the series of chapters focusing on the mechanics of witting and the best way to teach them. Lindeman mentions Bain's English Composition and Rhetoric, which can be a helpful tool in the structure of any writing. The tenets designated as important are usually most useful in the revision process.
The rest of the chapter follows some steps that can be used teaching paragraphing. The first important thing for composition writers to remember is that paragraphs are processes rather than products. Once that is understood, the instruction can proceed. Lindeman suggests that taping informal conversations can work to help students understand the flow of thinking and how that can be applied to writing, especially the coordinate and subordinate sequences.
The final segment of this chapter gives some sample lessons for teaching paragraphing.
Response:
I really like any type of instruction that attempts to make students feel as though they are already ready to master the concepts which are being presented to them. The "Paragraph as progress" idea that is featured in chapter nine reflects exactly thins concept. If the teacher is willing to put themselves on more of the level of a guide, I think that learning can flow more reciprocally.
As far as the actual teaching methods which Lindeman suggests, I was interested in the taped conversations and the revision lesson. Students would probably be interested in taping and analyzing their own conversations as opposed to looking at examples in textbooks. The revision lesson is a very important (and often underestimated) part of composition instruction. When words have been placed on a page they acquire a sense of permanence. It takes a lot of practice to master the art of editing.
Chapter nine is one in the series of chapters focusing on the mechanics of witting and the best way to teach them. Lindeman mentions Bain's English Composition and Rhetoric, which can be a helpful tool in the structure of any writing. The tenets designated as important are usually most useful in the revision process.
The rest of the chapter follows some steps that can be used teaching paragraphing. The first important thing for composition writers to remember is that paragraphs are processes rather than products. Once that is understood, the instruction can proceed. Lindeman suggests that taping informal conversations can work to help students understand the flow of thinking and how that can be applied to writing, especially the coordinate and subordinate sequences.
The final segment of this chapter gives some sample lessons for teaching paragraphing.
Response:
I really like any type of instruction that attempts to make students feel as though they are already ready to master the concepts which are being presented to them. The "Paragraph as progress" idea that is featured in chapter nine reflects exactly thins concept. If the teacher is willing to put themselves on more of the level of a guide, I think that learning can flow more reciprocally.
As far as the actual teaching methods which Lindeman suggests, I was interested in the taped conversations and the revision lesson. Students would probably be interested in taping and analyzing their own conversations as opposed to looking at examples in textbooks. The revision lesson is a very important (and often underestimated) part of composition instruction. When words have been placed on a page they acquire a sense of permanence. It takes a lot of practice to master the art of editing.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
More Research
When I wrote before about grammar instruction I had some opinions about it, but was not really sure how they might be implemented to actually improve student writing. Since that time, I have come to the conclusion that formal grammar instruction of any kind is basically not helpful in developing better writing. This would include rote memorization and drill exercises as well as usage and style suggestions. The problem is that many of the definitions used in grammar research still include this "etiquette" facet of grammar. I will begin my paper with a discussion of how the definition of grammar has been misconstrued and has actually hurt students because they get no instruction whatsoever. The next major point I will explore is what type of grammar is helpful to students. I have a plethora of evidence showing that sentence combining is the answer to developing syntactic maturity and eliminating many of the errors basic writers tend to commit. I also want to emphasize that many students think they do not like "grammar" because they have been made to feel as though they will never succeed. The truth is, they already have everything they need to succeed in this field.
My research presentation will underscore this point. Sentence combining relies on the transformational grammar, which says that all of our linguistic capabilities are in place by the time we enter school. Most students run into problems when they try to translate all of this knowledge from speech to writing. The teacher's job, then, is to give students as much practice in using their own capabilities to build better sentences. When the technique is used in groups and is discussed in class, there can be significant improvement in writing complex sentences and avoiding fundamental errors. During the presentation, I will actually engage our class in sentence combining exercises.
My research presentation will underscore this point. Sentence combining relies on the transformational grammar, which says that all of our linguistic capabilities are in place by the time we enter school. Most students run into problems when they try to translate all of this knowledge from speech to writing. The teacher's job, then, is to give students as much practice in using their own capabilities to build better sentences. When the technique is used in groups and is discussed in class, there can be significant improvement in writing complex sentences and avoiding fundamental errors. During the presentation, I will actually engage our class in sentence combining exercises.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Cognition and Its Place for Teachers
Summary:
This chapters explores (briefly) the creative process. Lindeman references Graham Wallas' The Art of Thought and the "four stages of creative problem-solving". All of these processes (preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification) validate Lyndemann's point about having to be able to not only synthesize information, but also to filter it through all of the sensory modes which are available to us.
The chapter has headings which tell of the author's intent to focus on how we come to cognition, some theories about the cognitive process, and the ramifications for the English teacher specifically.
The section which discusses perception begins by emphasizing the idea that every person translates what they perceive into knowledge through a different route because everyone is different, forming their own set of realities. The section concludes with a discussion about language and the Whorf hypothesis which theorizes that different languages can affect how different cultures perceive the world.
Conception is an important part of the cognitive process and is discussed in terms of prewriting. Lyndemann reminds her readers that just because someone is educated in one field that doesn't mean they are going to understand every discourse situation. She emphasizes the importance of developing writing assignments that can help every student reach their own writing potential.
Response:
All of the things that Lyndemann point out about how the cognitive process can be enhanced the more it is explored made me think of the college experience. I think that the reason people can become such well-rounded individuals at the university level is that they are introduced to so many different approaches to problem-solving. If the depth of perception can lead to a brighter illumination, then all of the general education classes which students dread could be one of the ways to improving thinking.
Another interesting thing was a fairly mundane story in the perception section. Lyndemann relates the story about the wood worker's ability to see the problem through the actual materials he is using and relates this to the feeling of when we "know what we mean but can't put it into words". It seems that this could be why some students are better writers than others. If they are more inclined to think in terms of words rather than working parts, it naturally follows that their writing would be more coherent.
This chapters explores (briefly) the creative process. Lindeman references Graham Wallas' The Art of Thought and the "four stages of creative problem-solving". All of these processes (preparation, incubation, illumination, and verification) validate Lyndemann's point about having to be able to not only synthesize information, but also to filter it through all of the sensory modes which are available to us.
The chapter has headings which tell of the author's intent to focus on how we come to cognition, some theories about the cognitive process, and the ramifications for the English teacher specifically.
The section which discusses perception begins by emphasizing the idea that every person translates what they perceive into knowledge through a different route because everyone is different, forming their own set of realities. The section concludes with a discussion about language and the Whorf hypothesis which theorizes that different languages can affect how different cultures perceive the world.
Conception is an important part of the cognitive process and is discussed in terms of prewriting. Lyndemann reminds her readers that just because someone is educated in one field that doesn't mean they are going to understand every discourse situation. She emphasizes the importance of developing writing assignments that can help every student reach their own writing potential.
Response:
All of the things that Lyndemann point out about how the cognitive process can be enhanced the more it is explored made me think of the college experience. I think that the reason people can become such well-rounded individuals at the university level is that they are introduced to so many different approaches to problem-solving. If the depth of perception can lead to a brighter illumination, then all of the general education classes which students dread could be one of the ways to improving thinking.
Another interesting thing was a fairly mundane story in the perception section. Lyndemann relates the story about the wood worker's ability to see the problem through the actual materials he is using and relates this to the feeling of when we "know what we mean but can't put it into words". It seems that this could be why some students are better writers than others. If they are more inclined to think in terms of words rather than working parts, it naturally follows that their writing would be more coherent.
Writing for Every Purpose
I am not sure that I am the best person to write for this topic. Since I have approached my education so non-sequentially, it is difficult for me to remember much of the writing I have done for classes other than English. I have vague recall of having a Biology class which had essay portions on the tests. The interesting thing about that is that I learned more about science in that class than at any other time. I think it has to do with the multi-layered approach to actually "knowing" something. In that class I was required to know the information for test as well as how to use it in the lab and finally I had to process that information well enough that I would be able to write intelligibly about it. Obviously the more levels that are appealed to in learning about anything, the better the student understands it.
There is another side to this, though, than simply having to write essays for tests. The expository writing that is at the center of most English classes can have a profound impact on the critical thinking skills that are required to succeed in any field. Any time a research project is assigned for a class, the students must spend time in all of the stages which are listed by Graham Wallas and referenced here through Erika Lindemann's text: preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. It does not really matter in what discipline these creative processes are honed as long as they are practiced. When a student realizes that they actually have the ability to expand on information and present it in coherent terms, their confidence is enhanced as well as their educational prospects.
There is another side to this, though, than simply having to write essays for tests. The expository writing that is at the center of most English classes can have a profound impact on the critical thinking skills that are required to succeed in any field. Any time a research project is assigned for a class, the students must spend time in all of the stages which are listed by Graham Wallas and referenced here through Erika Lindemann's text: preparation, incubation, illumination and verification. It does not really matter in what discipline these creative processes are honed as long as they are practiced. When a student realizes that they actually have the ability to expand on information and present it in coherent terms, their confidence is enhanced as well as their educational prospects.
Monday, October 15, 2007
Our Writing Center
I am not very sure how one tells the difference between Lunsford's "Center as Storehouse" or "The Center as Garrett" when only observing from the outside. Obviously, a center that is designed to further collaborative work ("Burkean Parlor Center") would be a little bit easier to identify. However, even after reading Lunsford's article about the amazing benefits of working together, I am unsure to the feasibility of a center designed around collaborative work. The center would have to be more like a class and teachers would have to be very involved in the center.
The writing center at USCA is most probably closest to the "Center as Storehouse" model which the author describes. when I have been in the writing center, there are usually one- three tutors available for consultation. When students come in, they can either work alone or ask one of the tutors for help. The tutor/tutee relationship begins at a table where the two work alone and the tutor gives out knowledge. However, there are probably elements of the "Garrett" center as well, simply as a by-product of the tutoring the student may uncover some hidden knowledge of their own.
I believe, along with Lunsford, that the "Storehouse" design can be beneficial. Unfortunately, the tutor is often placed in the uncomfortable position of being expected to know everything.
The writing center at USCA is most probably closest to the "Center as Storehouse" model which the author describes. when I have been in the writing center, there are usually one- three tutors available for consultation. When students come in, they can either work alone or ask one of the tutors for help. The tutor/tutee relationship begins at a table where the two work alone and the tutor gives out knowledge. However, there are probably elements of the "Garrett" center as well, simply as a by-product of the tutoring the student may uncover some hidden knowledge of their own.
I believe, along with Lunsford, that the "Storehouse" design can be beneficial. Unfortunately, the tutor is often placed in the uncomfortable position of being expected to know everything.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
mankind's conversation
Summary:
This article is a self-described musing on the issue of collaborative learning. The author (Kenneth A. Bruffee) reminds the reader that this is not a "recipe" for good collaborative learning, but rather a host of reasons that any teacher could and should try collaborative learning.
The first way that Bruffee attempts to get everyone on the collaborative learning bandwagon is to trace its history in English and American school systems. He sites the works of Edwin Mason and M.L.J. Abercrombie as establishing the validity of the "educational value" of several "collaborative forms".
The reasons for the rise of collaborative learning in America had to do with the vast influx of diverse learners which descended on campuses in the 1970's. Teachers used organized collaboration and peer groups to bring everyone to the same lever.
Bruffee goes on to tell why collaborative learning is still important. The first reason he gives is that thought, writing, and discourse are all related and function in the same way so that the more they are interconnected, the better the learner does at each task separately. Another important point is of knowledge communities and how our understanding of normal discourse can be a good starting point to entering those communities. Later in the article, Bruffe charges instructors as being the person responsible for inducting students through the gate of normal discourse.
There are additional sections on how collaboration helps the view of knowledge. One of the more interesting points is that of abnormal discourse and how this fresh approach to knowledge furthers the learning of any community.
Response:
I'm not exactly sure that I understand the point of this article, other than to remind people that it is important to incorporate group situations and opportunities into our lessons to encourage learning. I suppose that this is an important reminder, but it seems that these type of situations usually come about better on their own than through any lesson.
I have been involved in many group projects over the years and I have never felt I benefited from them at all. There are usually a few things that can come out of these forced collaboration. Sometimes one person does all the work; this happens either because the person wants to do all the work because they are controlling or because the other students don't care to do the work. Either way, nobody really learns any more than they would have through individual work. The other situation that I have also seen and been involved in is when everyone in the group is involved and interested. There is nothing wrong with this, but I don't really see how anyone learns anything more than they would have on their own and the scheduling conflicts that arise are more of a hindrance than anything else.
I do believe that entering "the conversation of mankind" helps us to communicate and think in more diverse and stratified ways. Unfortunately, I don't believe that this can be structured into a lesson plan; I think it simply has to happen from discussion.
This article is a self-described musing on the issue of collaborative learning. The author (Kenneth A. Bruffee) reminds the reader that this is not a "recipe" for good collaborative learning, but rather a host of reasons that any teacher could and should try collaborative learning.
The first way that Bruffee attempts to get everyone on the collaborative learning bandwagon is to trace its history in English and American school systems. He sites the works of Edwin Mason and M.L.J. Abercrombie as establishing the validity of the "educational value" of several "collaborative forms".
The reasons for the rise of collaborative learning in America had to do with the vast influx of diverse learners which descended on campuses in the 1970's. Teachers used organized collaboration and peer groups to bring everyone to the same lever.
Bruffee goes on to tell why collaborative learning is still important. The first reason he gives is that thought, writing, and discourse are all related and function in the same way so that the more they are interconnected, the better the learner does at each task separately. Another important point is of knowledge communities and how our understanding of normal discourse can be a good starting point to entering those communities. Later in the article, Bruffe charges instructors as being the person responsible for inducting students through the gate of normal discourse.
There are additional sections on how collaboration helps the view of knowledge. One of the more interesting points is that of abnormal discourse and how this fresh approach to knowledge furthers the learning of any community.
Response:
I'm not exactly sure that I understand the point of this article, other than to remind people that it is important to incorporate group situations and opportunities into our lessons to encourage learning. I suppose that this is an important reminder, but it seems that these type of situations usually come about better on their own than through any lesson.
I have been involved in many group projects over the years and I have never felt I benefited from them at all. There are usually a few things that can come out of these forced collaboration. Sometimes one person does all the work; this happens either because the person wants to do all the work because they are controlling or because the other students don't care to do the work. Either way, nobody really learns any more than they would have through individual work. The other situation that I have also seen and been involved in is when everyone in the group is involved and interested. There is nothing wrong with this, but I don't really see how anyone learns anything more than they would have on their own and the scheduling conflicts that arise are more of a hindrance than anything else.
I do believe that entering "the conversation of mankind" helps us to communicate and think in more diverse and stratified ways. Unfortunately, I don't believe that this can be structured into a lesson plan; I think it simply has to happen from discussion.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Avoiding Plagiarism
Summary:
This peice of writing is a statement by the WPA that aims to set a foundation for the understanding and treatment of plagiarism. The article begins by stating that there seems to have been an increased problem with plagiarism with the advent of the Internet. The article is organized into four points which are listed at the beginning of the article.
The first thing that is done is to define plagiarism as a deliberate act of taking ideas or language and not giving credit where it is due. The authors make a definite distinction between academic dishonesty misuse of sources at this point which is a predominate theme for the rest of the article.
The next section of the article deals with causes for plagiarism and also for the misuse of sources. The causes for plagiarism include poor time management, lack of consequences, and fear of failure. The causes for misuse of sources include a lack of knowledge about note taking and source integration.
Students, teachers, and administrators are all charged with certain responsibilities which could eliminate much of the plagiarism and misuse of sources. The students should know how, the teachers should tell them how and make the consequences clear, and the administrators should set the disciplinary action and provide support for faculty.
The final section of the article gives pedagogical advice for teachers on how to teach the research process and implement effective assignments.
Response:
I agreed with the definition of plagiarism that was given, although I thought they might have explained the common knowledge idea a little more. The article was effective in that it used the definition to rationalize the rest of the points and the organization of the remainder of the article.
I really liked the section that was labeled "best practices". One of the most effective things that I think teachers can do is to explain the reasons why research is done. If there is a topic which interests students, I think they would be more likely to actually find the answers they are seeking. Also, seeing the process rather than just the finished product would be helpful to students. I think that papers (especially by beginning writers) should give a good deal of credit for the process, since this is supposed to be one of the most important things in a research paper. I also liked the idea of the themed class design to help students narrow in on a topic. However, I am not sure how this might be implemented in a high school classroom.
Another point that I had never really considered, but which they discussed in detail in the responsibilities and best practices, was the issue of creating challenging writing assignments to avoid plagiarism. This is something that I know will be useful to me in my own teaching career.
This peice of writing is a statement by the WPA that aims to set a foundation for the understanding and treatment of plagiarism. The article begins by stating that there seems to have been an increased problem with plagiarism with the advent of the Internet. The article is organized into four points which are listed at the beginning of the article.
The first thing that is done is to define plagiarism as a deliberate act of taking ideas or language and not giving credit where it is due. The authors make a definite distinction between academic dishonesty misuse of sources at this point which is a predominate theme for the rest of the article.
The next section of the article deals with causes for plagiarism and also for the misuse of sources. The causes for plagiarism include poor time management, lack of consequences, and fear of failure. The causes for misuse of sources include a lack of knowledge about note taking and source integration.
Students, teachers, and administrators are all charged with certain responsibilities which could eliminate much of the plagiarism and misuse of sources. The students should know how, the teachers should tell them how and make the consequences clear, and the administrators should set the disciplinary action and provide support for faculty.
The final section of the article gives pedagogical advice for teachers on how to teach the research process and implement effective assignments.
Response:
I agreed with the definition of plagiarism that was given, although I thought they might have explained the common knowledge idea a little more. The article was effective in that it used the definition to rationalize the rest of the points and the organization of the remainder of the article.
I really liked the section that was labeled "best practices". One of the most effective things that I think teachers can do is to explain the reasons why research is done. If there is a topic which interests students, I think they would be more likely to actually find the answers they are seeking. Also, seeing the process rather than just the finished product would be helpful to students. I think that papers (especially by beginning writers) should give a good deal of credit for the process, since this is supposed to be one of the most important things in a research paper. I also liked the idea of the themed class design to help students narrow in on a topic. However, I am not sure how this might be implemented in a high school classroom.
Another point that I had never really considered, but which they discussed in detail in the responsibilities and best practices, was the issue of creating challenging writing assignments to avoid plagiarism. This is something that I know will be useful to me in my own teaching career.
Plagiarism
I have been writing for quite some time and I have never even considered that I might be plagiarizing, yet there have been moments in my college writing career when it was so heavily focused on in the discussion of the research paper that I felt that I might be guilty. It seems strange to me that there can be so much problem with plagiarism, but maybe that has to do with the definition. I have always thought that plagiarism was intentional, word-for-word copying of someone's thoughts and ideas. I think that teacher's hold the key to distinguishing between plagiarism and misuse of sources or faulty citations. When teachers overemphasize the aspect of plagiarism that I have labeled as poor research, I think student's feel the same ridiculous guilt that I have felt during these ineffective discussions.
I have never given much thought to common knowledge, but I guess that it usually seems to reveal itself as I am doing research. While I may cite a certain fact during my early research, if I subsequently read it in four or five other sources, I tend to incorporate it into my own knowledge base about the subject. I think this is another place where teachers have to really focus on the research process; if these things are solidly understood, I think many of the "plagiarism" issues will work themselves out.
I have never given much thought to common knowledge, but I guess that it usually seems to reveal itself as I am doing research. While I may cite a certain fact during my early research, if I subsequently read it in four or five other sources, I tend to incorporate it into my own knowledge base about the subject. I think this is another place where teachers have to really focus on the research process; if these things are solidly understood, I think many of the "plagiarism" issues will work themselves out.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Writing Assignments
Students could be assigned an essay by one of the early proponents of the form, like Francis Bacon. I realize that this would be more feasible in some high school classes than others, but I think the chosen essay could be worked through in most classes. When Bacon was introduced, I would like to also introduce the sense of "essay" the Renaissance writer would have used: "to muse". Once the assigned article was read and the genre understood (through class discussion or readers notebooks), I would suggest one or two quotes to form their own response.
The quotes would serve as a basis for their own opinion of whether or not Bacon had been successful in what he was saying. The students would use the suggested quotes as a starting point, but must include one additional quote to support their stance.
The conlusion of the reflection would contain the student's own opinion on whether the essay was the appropriate forum to make a point about whatever the writer (in this case Bacon) was aiming for, or perhaps a different style may have been more useful.
I believe that this assignment would pretty well cover all of the goals of successful reading and comprehending: content and analysis would be discussion led (or maybe in group work), while interpretation and integration would result from their own writing.
The quotes would serve as a basis for their own opinion of whether or not Bacon had been successful in what he was saying. The students would use the suggested quotes as a starting point, but must include one additional quote to support their stance.
The conlusion of the reflection would contain the student's own opinion on whether the essay was the appropriate forum to make a point about whatever the writer (in this case Bacon) was aiming for, or perhaps a different style may have been more useful.
I believe that this assignment would pretty well cover all of the goals of successful reading and comprehending: content and analysis would be discussion led (or maybe in group work), while interpretation and integration would result from their own writing.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Rhetorical Reading Strategies
Summary:
This article is an exploration of the theoretical realm of rhetorical reading. Linda Flower and Christina Haas entered their unique experiment with the supposition that there may be something to the idea that if students could see their readings as a joining into an actual discourse relationship rather than a simple task of knowledge gathering, they may become more proficient readers, writers, and thinkers. The problem with a supposition, however, is that it is completely unsubstantiated. Flower and Haas attempt, after explaining their stance, etc., to construct an experiment that may shed some light onto this problem. The trouble they face, however, is that during "constructive reading" -- in which the reader gathers nodes of information into a "rich network of disparate kinds of information"-- the actual building takes place in the mind in a myriad of ways. The experiment used four "experienced" readers, and six "student" readers. All of the readers were required to assess the text at nine different points to let the testers observe how the construction was going on. The results showed that both the student and experienced readers performed equally well on the content and feature strategies of reading the passage; the experienced readers far outperformed the student readers on seeing the passage as a discourse situation through the classic tenets of rhetoric.
Response:
This article and its experiment were fascinating to me. I had never really thought of reading beyond the simple act of understanding what is being said, although I suppose I do it all of the time. I have to admit, though, that that is probably a recent development in my life as a reader. The authors don't really seem to come to any kind of conclusive state about why the experienced readers may view the passage as part of a larger discourse community. Given my own personal experience, I would suggest that perhaps this is due to their being in the college community for longer. When a passage is assigned at the University level, it is with the purpose of being useful to the student's education and is discussed and dissected, usually in class, but also in various writing assignments. I think that the longer someone is exposed to the type of discussion that brings awareness about the passage as part of a rhetorical relationship, the more their mind will begin to develop that type of thinking.
Unfortunately, this type of theory doesn't seem all that useful to me. I am not sure that this is the type of thing that can be taught by implementing some new assignment into a lesson plan. I believe that this is one of those skills (like good writing) that is achieved through a layering effect. The authors mention that the experienced readers were not dissecting their comments through strata, but that doesn't negate the fact that learning comes that way. The mind can integrate many things once it has been honed to be receptive to certain things.
This article is an exploration of the theoretical realm of rhetorical reading. Linda Flower and Christina Haas entered their unique experiment with the supposition that there may be something to the idea that if students could see their readings as a joining into an actual discourse relationship rather than a simple task of knowledge gathering, they may become more proficient readers, writers, and thinkers. The problem with a supposition, however, is that it is completely unsubstantiated. Flower and Haas attempt, after explaining their stance, etc., to construct an experiment that may shed some light onto this problem. The trouble they face, however, is that during "constructive reading" -- in which the reader gathers nodes of information into a "rich network of disparate kinds of information"-- the actual building takes place in the mind in a myriad of ways. The experiment used four "experienced" readers, and six "student" readers. All of the readers were required to assess the text at nine different points to let the testers observe how the construction was going on. The results showed that both the student and experienced readers performed equally well on the content and feature strategies of reading the passage; the experienced readers far outperformed the student readers on seeing the passage as a discourse situation through the classic tenets of rhetoric.
Response:
This article and its experiment were fascinating to me. I had never really thought of reading beyond the simple act of understanding what is being said, although I suppose I do it all of the time. I have to admit, though, that that is probably a recent development in my life as a reader. The authors don't really seem to come to any kind of conclusive state about why the experienced readers may view the passage as part of a larger discourse community. Given my own personal experience, I would suggest that perhaps this is due to their being in the college community for longer. When a passage is assigned at the University level, it is with the purpose of being useful to the student's education and is discussed and dissected, usually in class, but also in various writing assignments. I think that the longer someone is exposed to the type of discussion that brings awareness about the passage as part of a rhetorical relationship, the more their mind will begin to develop that type of thinking.
Unfortunately, this type of theory doesn't seem all that useful to me. I am not sure that this is the type of thing that can be taught by implementing some new assignment into a lesson plan. I believe that this is one of those skills (like good writing) that is achieved through a layering effect. The authors mention that the experienced readers were not dissecting their comments through strata, but that doesn't negate the fact that learning comes that way. The mind can integrate many things once it has been honed to be receptive to certain things.
Monday, September 24, 2007
Research Assignment
I have decided to focus on the issue of grammar education in public schools. I am interested in several aspects of this issue and am still kind of deciding in which way I should go. For instance, does the teaching of grammar help students write (or even speak) better? If there are any benefits to learning the mechanics of the language in your everyday life, at what point in a student's education should this be tackled? (ie elementary or highschool) Also, I am curious if perhaps the grammar itself has become antiquated and therefore not very useful in the actual workplace. I am thinking of the rules concerning gerunds and thier subjects or pronouns in the objective case. If no one knows these rules, should they be taught at all?
The final thing I have pondered is the actual method used in teaching grammar: prescriptive or descriptive? I think that I have kind of already decided that the prescriptive method of rote memorization and correctness is basically ineffectual so I guess my question would concern the descriptive method and how it would be implemented.
The final thing I have pondered is the actual method used in teaching grammar: prescriptive or descriptive? I think that I have kind of already decided that the prescriptive method of rote memorization and correctness is basically ineffectual so I guess my question would concern the descriptive method and how it would be implemented.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Designing Writing Courses
Summary:
This comprehensive chapter begins by giving the author's definition of teaching as a rhetorical activity. In other words, the purpose and audience should be considered carefully by the teacher and be ready to shift with the needs of that purpose and audience.
The second section of this chapter is a draft of the NCTE's foundation for writing courses through the act, purpose, scene, teacher, and means of writing. In each of these discussions there are goals listed that are there, theoretically, to enhance the writing course.
A discussion of "what" (process centered) and "how" (student centered) course models follows the foundational elements of any writing class. The models are discussed in detail of how the class is taught and the goals of each respectively. The process centered classes are further divided into individual and collaborative settings.
The rest of this chapter deals with the specifics of how to organize and structure any writing class effectively through the use of syllabus, weekly and daily lesson plans, and finally the teacher's actual performance.
Response:
I thought this chapter was enormously helpful. When I first read the title, I didn't really think that it would be all that beneficial for a public school teacher since, let's face it, the classes are designed for the teacher more than the other way around and the goals are usually already in place in the guise of standards and administrative expectations.
However, I was impressed with the layout. First of all, I thought the introduction to the "what" and "how" models were good because they are good tools in helping the future educator in developing their philosophy of teaching.
The sections which seemed the best, though, were those concerned with organization and teacher performance. I had never really considered the freedom which might be found in the ultra-structured arena of high school English courses, but the author gave great tips for developing your own style within the set parameters. It was also nice to get a different take on the lesson plans, since most of the ones education students see are already set. This put the lesson plan in a different perspective for me.
The final section on teacher performance was also helpful. I won't be doing my student teaching until next year but I will definitely be using Lindeman's text as a guide when I do.
This comprehensive chapter begins by giving the author's definition of teaching as a rhetorical activity. In other words, the purpose and audience should be considered carefully by the teacher and be ready to shift with the needs of that purpose and audience.
The second section of this chapter is a draft of the NCTE's foundation for writing courses through the act, purpose, scene, teacher, and means of writing. In each of these discussions there are goals listed that are there, theoretically, to enhance the writing course.
A discussion of "what" (process centered) and "how" (student centered) course models follows the foundational elements of any writing class. The models are discussed in detail of how the class is taught and the goals of each respectively. The process centered classes are further divided into individual and collaborative settings.
The rest of this chapter deals with the specifics of how to organize and structure any writing class effectively through the use of syllabus, weekly and daily lesson plans, and finally the teacher's actual performance.
Response:
I thought this chapter was enormously helpful. When I first read the title, I didn't really think that it would be all that beneficial for a public school teacher since, let's face it, the classes are designed for the teacher more than the other way around and the goals are usually already in place in the guise of standards and administrative expectations.
However, I was impressed with the layout. First of all, I thought the introduction to the "what" and "how" models were good because they are good tools in helping the future educator in developing their philosophy of teaching.
The sections which seemed the best, though, were those concerned with organization and teacher performance. I had never really considered the freedom which might be found in the ultra-structured arena of high school English courses, but the author gave great tips for developing your own style within the set parameters. It was also nice to get a different take on the lesson plans, since most of the ones education students see are already set. This put the lesson plan in a different perspective for me.
The final section on teacher performance was also helpful. I won't be doing my student teaching until next year but I will definitely be using Lindeman's text as a guide when I do.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Chapter Three
Summary:
This chapter is a survey of the actual process which writers go through in order to produce their work. The author begins by describing many of her own processes in writing the textbook. She does this to explore the complex system the writer must traverse: "Clearly, writing is a messy business, rarely in real life as tidy as textbooks describe it."
However, for simplicity's sake, the author does divide the steps of writing into the classic three: prewriting, writing, and rewriting. Relying heavily on Linda Flower and John Haye's various articles and books by Janet Emig and James Britton, Lindeman begins her foray into the tentative world of writing.
The prewriting section focuses on taking what we know and developing it through our self and various other social frameworks.
The writing section discusses the act of "translating" our thoughts into drafts.
Finally, the rewriting portion delves into revision through two avenues: editing, which takes care of mechanical errors, and reviewing, which is more complex and concerns the writer vacillating between internal and external revision.
Response:
I actually found this chapter really interesting because of the topic. These writing techniques are something that I use all of the time, but I haven't ever really thought of other people having to travel the same well-worn paths as myself. Who knew that when I was just in the "percolating" stage of prewriting I was actually using Platonic invention? Of course, it is true that all of our molding of ideas is influenced by other people and even other sources around us.
What I most enjoyed about this chapter, however, was the attention to our future students. These writing techniques have become second nature by this stage for us, but our students may have little to no experience approaching critical writing such as this. I think it is important to be reminded that it is our job to help "students become conscious of what they do as they plan a writing project, by modeling or discussing with students the kinds of goal-based plans we might develop in responding to an assignment...".
The most important thing I think I gleaned from all of this information is that the teacher needs to be cognizant of all of the intricacies that are occurring when effective writing is happening, and help the students move through all of these phases. We must not forget what it feels like to be a fledgling medium of the written word.
This chapter is a survey of the actual process which writers go through in order to produce their work. The author begins by describing many of her own processes in writing the textbook. She does this to explore the complex system the writer must traverse: "Clearly, writing is a messy business, rarely in real life as tidy as textbooks describe it."
However, for simplicity's sake, the author does divide the steps of writing into the classic three: prewriting, writing, and rewriting. Relying heavily on Linda Flower and John Haye's various articles and books by Janet Emig and James Britton, Lindeman begins her foray into the tentative world of writing.
The prewriting section focuses on taking what we know and developing it through our self and various other social frameworks.
The writing section discusses the act of "translating" our thoughts into drafts.
Finally, the rewriting portion delves into revision through two avenues: editing, which takes care of mechanical errors, and reviewing, which is more complex and concerns the writer vacillating between internal and external revision.
Response:
I actually found this chapter really interesting because of the topic. These writing techniques are something that I use all of the time, but I haven't ever really thought of other people having to travel the same well-worn paths as myself. Who knew that when I was just in the "percolating" stage of prewriting I was actually using Platonic invention? Of course, it is true that all of our molding of ideas is influenced by other people and even other sources around us.
What I most enjoyed about this chapter, however, was the attention to our future students. These writing techniques have become second nature by this stage for us, but our students may have little to no experience approaching critical writing such as this. I think it is important to be reminded that it is our job to help "students become conscious of what they do as they plan a writing project, by modeling or discussing with students the kinds of goal-based plans we might develop in responding to an assignment...".
The most important thing I think I gleaned from all of this information is that the teacher needs to be cognizant of all of the intricacies that are occurring when effective writing is happening, and help the students move through all of these phases. We must not forget what it feels like to be a fledgling medium of the written word.
The Writing Process
When I have an assignment for a "term" paper, I typically begin by simply thinking about it. Whenever the assignment comes around on my "things to do" docket in my head, I try to think about a topic that will fit nicely with the assignment and that I am interested in learning more about or exploring further. Once I have my topic, I begin to take notes in my writing notebook. These pages of notes will be what I sit down with to draft my paper. The pages are usually covered with sloppy handwriting, arrows, and big spaces between unrelated ideas. When I finally sit down to draft my paper I use these notes and any sources that I may be incorporating. This first draft is really tough for me and I always dread it more than any other. I am attempting to suture my ideas-- to coalesce my mental ramblings into an actual paper. When I type my paper is my second revision, the one in which I give my rough draft paragraphs, nice wording, etc. I always revise one more time, with a hard copy of my second draft.
This process, though, is only for "big" papers. For any writing assignment I begin in the same way: just thinking about the format and topic for my assignment. I will usually still write a draft down on paper, just to help myself work through how I want to organize my thoughts. Sometimes, I don't even use this hand-written drat when I actually type my paper because the format is already in my head.
Now that I've written this, it occurs to me that I tend to cushion the more difficult assignments with as many steps and revisions as possible.
This process, though, is only for "big" papers. For any writing assignment I begin in the same way: just thinking about the format and topic for my assignment. I will usually still write a draft down on paper, just to help myself work through how I want to organize my thoughts. Sometimes, I don't even use this hand-written drat when I actually type my paper because the format is already in my head.
Now that I've written this, it occurs to me that I tend to cushion the more difficult assignments with as many steps and revisions as possible.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Robert Fulkerson's "Four Philosophies of Comnposition"
Summary:
Robert Fulkerson's "Four Philosophies of Composition" is basically what the title implies. He uses four theories of literary criticism to build his new philosophies, which include reader- based writing (rhetorical), writer-based writing (expressive), reality-based writing (mimetic), and writing which emphasizes the actual structure of writing (formalist). When describing each of these philosophies separately, he gives examples of writers and texts which correspond to them.
In essence, these theories are nothing new, Fulkerson takes the idea of composition instruction a crucial step further: he contends that the most important element of teaching any of these theories is to actually focus on one at a time. The article also includes statements on ways which these theories can be used to shape pedagogical standing and beliefs.
Response:
On the whole, I enjoyed this article very much. I thought the writing was clear and concise and his theories well-thought out as well as recognizable.
I believe Fulkerson is correct in his assumption that one of the most important tasks for a teacher is effective communication of the goals of any given assignment and the subsequent evaluation of those goals. This is especially true for novice writers who may not be as confident in their abilities as someone a bit more seasoned. If a student is shaky in their abilities and receives a garbles set of instructions and a mediocre grade, no valuable work has been accomplished by the instructor or the student.
The only thing I thought may have been a tad overstated was Fulkerson's stringent stance that a teacher should maintain one and only one of these philosophies to shape their composition class. He states that "composition teachers either fail to have a consistent value theory or fail to let that philosophy shape pedagogy". I simply don't understand why all of these theories cannot be effectively compartmentalized by specific assignments, therefore still existing harmoniously in the same classroom.
Robert Fulkerson's "Four Philosophies of Composition" is basically what the title implies. He uses four theories of literary criticism to build his new philosophies, which include reader- based writing (rhetorical), writer-based writing (expressive), reality-based writing (mimetic), and writing which emphasizes the actual structure of writing (formalist). When describing each of these philosophies separately, he gives examples of writers and texts which correspond to them.
In essence, these theories are nothing new, Fulkerson takes the idea of composition instruction a crucial step further: he contends that the most important element of teaching any of these theories is to actually focus on one at a time. The article also includes statements on ways which these theories can be used to shape pedagogical standing and beliefs.
Response:
On the whole, I enjoyed this article very much. I thought the writing was clear and concise and his theories well-thought out as well as recognizable.
I believe Fulkerson is correct in his assumption that one of the most important tasks for a teacher is effective communication of the goals of any given assignment and the subsequent evaluation of those goals. This is especially true for novice writers who may not be as confident in their abilities as someone a bit more seasoned. If a student is shaky in their abilities and receives a garbles set of instructions and a mediocre grade, no valuable work has been accomplished by the instructor or the student.
The only thing I thought may have been a tad overstated was Fulkerson's stringent stance that a teacher should maintain one and only one of these philosophies to shape their composition class. He states that "composition teachers either fail to have a consistent value theory or fail to let that philosophy shape pedagogy". I simply don't understand why all of these theories cannot be effectively compartmentalized by specific assignments, therefore still existing harmoniously in the same classroom.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Lost in the Woods: Teaching Composition Theory
I chose to use Robert Fulkerson's "Four Philosophies of Composition" to analyze my textbook, Problem Solving Strategies for Writing by Linda Flower.
There are several statements in the preface which describe the type of instruction being attempted by the author of this book. Flower acknowledges several times the importance of writing for the academic "community" and the student joining this ongoing conversation which seems to suggest the rhetorical function. I think this is probably the most solidly explored of Fulkerson's four theories, though even this is only discussed in two chapters.
Another chapter draws on the mimetic theory by touching on the importance of research, yet this is only a brief diversion at the very end of the book. There is another section earlier in the book which focuses on the expressive by showing the student how to "construct their own internal, mental representations of meaning". These two things seem at odds with one another when viewed even equally, and given the fact that the research element isn't even brought up until so far in the text, it underscores the division of approaches.
The formalist theory is barely brought up at all. In fact, the only nod to the actual mechanics of writing (which so many composition students struggle with) is in the 5th Chapter, which "shows students how to look at language".
It seems that this book does have a general emphasis, and that is Fulkerson's rhetorical theory. However, it seems that the information and approaches are presented in such a convoluted fashion, as to only contribute to the "mindlessness" which Fulkerson so despaired over.
There are several statements in the preface which describe the type of instruction being attempted by the author of this book. Flower acknowledges several times the importance of writing for the academic "community" and the student joining this ongoing conversation which seems to suggest the rhetorical function. I think this is probably the most solidly explored of Fulkerson's four theories, though even this is only discussed in two chapters.
Another chapter draws on the mimetic theory by touching on the importance of research, yet this is only a brief diversion at the very end of the book. There is another section earlier in the book which focuses on the expressive by showing the student how to "construct their own internal, mental representations of meaning". These two things seem at odds with one another when viewed even equally, and given the fact that the research element isn't even brought up until so far in the text, it underscores the division of approaches.
The formalist theory is barely brought up at all. In fact, the only nod to the actual mechanics of writing (which so many composition students struggle with) is in the 5th Chapter, which "shows students how to look at language".
It seems that this book does have a general emphasis, and that is Fulkerson's rhetorical theory. However, it seems that the information and approaches are presented in such a convoluted fashion, as to only contribute to the "mindlessness" which Fulkerson so despaired over.
Sunday, September 2, 2007
Chapter One: Summary and Response
Summary
This chapter introduces the concept of effective writing instruction. The chapter begins by describing some of the difficulties which can arise when trying to effectively teach writing as a skill. One of the major hurdles a new teacher of writing may face is that of convincing her students that writing is indeed important and worthy of not only their time, but also their consideration.
The author gives two pragmatic reasons for the teaching and the learning of writing, while also appealing to the higher causes of self-enlightenment and imagination. Perhaps the listed reasons of writing for economic power, knowledge, and social inclusion can effectively blend "discipline and imagination" for students of all strata.
Response
As with most anything that we must filter through our brains, I found things I liked and others that didn't appeal to me.
For instance, I thought the discussion was a bit heavy on the "social necessity" section. Although the idea of remembering and organizing our lives is a very practical and necessary function arising from language, I don't really think this is a worthy endeavor for the teacher of writing. After all, these things either fall into place or they don't. Everyone will have to make lists but some people don't think to record their daily lives in journals or even a daily planner.
I think that the "lockstep instruction in prose mechanics" that is so handily dismissed by the authors is a result of our psychologically obsessed society. Many high-school writing programs have made it their mission to simply get kids writing, and ignore the most fundamental rules of grammar in doing so. While I think that a balance does need to be found between the two extremes, I don't feel confident that a desirable solution is being sought.
This chapter introduces the concept of effective writing instruction. The chapter begins by describing some of the difficulties which can arise when trying to effectively teach writing as a skill. One of the major hurdles a new teacher of writing may face is that of convincing her students that writing is indeed important and worthy of not only their time, but also their consideration.
The author gives two pragmatic reasons for the teaching and the learning of writing, while also appealing to the higher causes of self-enlightenment and imagination. Perhaps the listed reasons of writing for economic power, knowledge, and social inclusion can effectively blend "discipline and imagination" for students of all strata.
Response
As with most anything that we must filter through our brains, I found things I liked and others that didn't appeal to me.
For instance, I thought the discussion was a bit heavy on the "social necessity" section. Although the idea of remembering and organizing our lives is a very practical and necessary function arising from language, I don't really think this is a worthy endeavor for the teacher of writing. After all, these things either fall into place or they don't. Everyone will have to make lists but some people don't think to record their daily lives in journals or even a daily planner.
I think that the "lockstep instruction in prose mechanics" that is so handily dismissed by the authors is a result of our psychologically obsessed society. Many high-school writing programs have made it their mission to simply get kids writing, and ignore the most fundamental rules of grammar in doing so. While I think that a balance does need to be found between the two extremes, I don't feel confident that a desirable solution is being sought.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Writing Idiosyncracies
When I write anything, I have to use Pilot's Precise V5 pen. I use this pen for schoolwork, grocery lists, journal entries, doodles on the margin of my paper, and any type of nonsensical ramblings. If I can't find one of my pens, I'm totally lost.
As far as writings that are required for school, I still have to write them down on paper to get started. However, I type it out pretty early to make sure that I have time for several revisions. This typing phase is probably the most serious (and productive) of my writing stages. I plan on spending several hours (ALONE) to focus on the revision and I like to have silence. Also, I plan on having a little reward of some downtime with my family or friends later on that day. I can't think of a much better feeling than having finished a big writing assignment and meeting up with my buddies where the party is already in full swing.
I was a pretty horrible student when I was younger, usually depending on my magnificent brainpower rather than any type of actual work to produce my papers. I probably wrote many, many poor papers during this time period that I don't think I can count in the "worst paper" category. I think the worst paper I have written in recent memory was one on which I actually received an A. The problem with the paper was my sheer mortification of having to write on the assigned subject: "Pretend that you are retiring from education. Describe the things that fellow educators and former students have to say at your retirement dinner." I threatened anyone who even thought of looking at the computer while I was writing the paper.
The best paper that I have ever written would probably also be judged on subject matter. Being a grammar person, I really enjoyed writing my paper on discourse markers. I felt that the paper was succinct while still being sufficiently analytical and informative without being overly loaded with jargon. I received an A and the praise of my professor.
As far as writings that are required for school, I still have to write them down on paper to get started. However, I type it out pretty early to make sure that I have time for several revisions. This typing phase is probably the most serious (and productive) of my writing stages. I plan on spending several hours (ALONE) to focus on the revision and I like to have silence. Also, I plan on having a little reward of some downtime with my family or friends later on that day. I can't think of a much better feeling than having finished a big writing assignment and meeting up with my buddies where the party is already in full swing.
I was a pretty horrible student when I was younger, usually depending on my magnificent brainpower rather than any type of actual work to produce my papers. I probably wrote many, many poor papers during this time period that I don't think I can count in the "worst paper" category. I think the worst paper I have written in recent memory was one on which I actually received an A. The problem with the paper was my sheer mortification of having to write on the assigned subject: "Pretend that you are retiring from education. Describe the things that fellow educators and former students have to say at your retirement dinner." I threatened anyone who even thought of looking at the computer while I was writing the paper.
The best paper that I have ever written would probably also be judged on subject matter. Being a grammar person, I really enjoyed writing my paper on discourse markers. I felt that the paper was succinct while still being sufficiently analytical and informative without being overly loaded with jargon. I received an A and the praise of my professor.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Introduction
Hi! My name is Leslie Walters and I am a Secondary Education major, with a concentration in English. I am in education (specifically English) because I really love reading, writing, and language. The fall semester is a challenge for me because I live with two hadcore Clemson Tiger fans (my husband and my son) who always try to coerce me into being as interested in how many yards were racked up for/against the illustrious Tigers as they are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)