|
|
-
This blog is in response to Darcy’s statement about commenting to her students using our composition “speak.” I agree with her entirely that we should not alienate our students with terms that they will most likely never need to understand. As it is, I get enough blank stares when I use the terms “word choice” or “awkward transition.” While I feel that these statements are clear enough, I do not presume to just throw them at my students and let them attempt to fix the problems blindly. When I include them in commenting, I try to offer a few suggestions to fix the sentence so that they are aware of the problem and possible solutions. I do not do this throughout an entire essay, but I like to give each student some kind of marker as they revise their papers. I do not believe that this is “babysitting” or “dumbing down.” I feel that if my students are to improve as writers they need to have an honest understanding of what is lacking in their writing. If a student really has no idea what tense shifting is, I’m not going to dismiss them because I feel it is obvious or something they should already know. Moreover, these are just basic terms that our students may be unaware of, so it is unreasonable to use our jargon and expect a response. In all likelihood, excessive use of advanced composition terminology will create a barrier between instructor and student. As it is our goal to enhance our students’ communication skills, it would be irresponsible to alienate them with our language.
|
-
I chose to read Marisa’s annotation on Kenneth Bruffee’s article “Collaborative Learning and the ‘Conversation of Mankind’” because I am very interested in the exact definition of collaborative learning in the composition community. I find that I often associate collaborative learning with the standard group project that is assigned in many classrooms. Because of this, I have had many questions about taking the idea of collaborative learning beyond this generic example. Prior to reading this article and re-analyzing it after reading Marissa’s annotation, I was unaware that there was any innovative thinking on the subject.
Marisa extracts several main points from Bruffee’s article in her annotation. The first point is that collaborative learning encourages conversation. She notes that Bruffee regards conversation as an inherent element in good writing by including his statement that “any effort to understand how we think requires us to understand the nature of conversation.” I agree with this thinking. I believe that as conversation and composition are both elements of communication, they should be developed simultaneously. The second point that Bruffee makes is that collaborative learning in the classroom is essential in this development because it provides a social context for practical conversation. I found this to be an interesting note as it gave me a greater understanding of the practical use of collaborative learning beyond the group project. However, there are always problems found in the practice of collaborative learning and Marisa includes Bruffee’s recognition of these problems. While he does not offer a definitive solution in his article, he does advise that having an understanding of the theory and history behind collaborative learning can “demonstrate its educational value.”
|
-
I really enjoyed reading David's annotation of James C. Conroy's "Poetry and Human Growth." The article focuses on using poetry in the classroom as a developmental tool for analytical reasoning. I find it interesting that Conroy would choose this genre because it is certainly one that most students find intimidating. It is refreshing to find an educator that moves past the idea of composition class as an essay-factory. By moving students out of their "comfort zone," they are forced to really think about the material in front of them rather than just pump out another generic research paper.
The main points of the article make a strong argument for utilizing poetry in the classroom. David's summary explains that analyzing poetry forces students to think concisely because of the precise language that is used. This is an essential tool in developing language skills. Second, the emotional and mental demands of reading poetry inevitably result in forcing a novice writer past initial insecurities in their thinking and writing. The subject matter and presentation necessitate critical thinking and thought formation. David's annotation also notes that the ever-present metaphors used in poetry are also critical in developing mature writers because metaphors link new ideas for the individual to reach unique conclusions. While it is almost certain that most students will initially fight the assignments that center on critical thinking and poetry, I feel that if they gain the skills that Conroy discusses their resistance will be replaced with a better appreciation for the benefits of analytical writing. I agree with David's statement that "perhaps poetry can provide the drive to use composition for a means, instead of an instructor assigned end."
|
-
The issues raised in Laura Julier’s “Community Service Pedagogy” are interesting as they seem to attach themselves to many of the pedagogies described in our “handbook”. It seems that, in theory, community-service learning is a wonderful expansion on composition outside of the classroom. However, as is the problem with many of the pedagogies we have discussed, there is no clear answer as to the best way to implement this school of composition. There are a hundred concerns about the proper way to assign service-learning projects, the proper context for students to develop this writing, the way that instructors facilitate these projects and, above all, the grading system. Each theorist has a personal method and as appears to be the case in all pedagogical discussions, no one method is exactly right and no one method is exactly wrong. There is always room for debate. This is where I personally have a problem with assigning myself to a particular pedagogy.
While certainly serving to enhance the authors’ persuasive writing skills in drafting pedagogical arguments, I feel that the constant debate surrounding these theories generally serves to take away from the positive aspects of respective pedagogies. Take service-learning composition for example. There are so many beneficial components of this pedagogy. The student learns to write for a larger audience. The purpose of the writing has a greater importance than merely earning a letter grade. The student learns that good writing skills are relevant outside of the classroom. These are the goals that we are trying to achieve as composition teachers regardless of our pedagogical stance. Do the particulars of theoretical implementation matter if we achieve these goals? I don’t think so. I feel that rather than pinpoint a standard set of rules to subscribe to in any pedagogy, we should ultimately focus on the outcome. Every teacher is different, as is every student. Education is primarily about experimentation and finding a method that works for us personally. Rather than debate theories, I think we would be better served to put them into practice. I know that this is oversimplifying the issue, but I genuinely believe that this would serve our students better than any amount of research and debate.
|
-
In reading over Susan Jarratt’s “Feminist Pedagogy,” I am most struck by the finding that students do not respond to or respect a female teacher in the same way they would a male teacher. This resistance “to the exercise of power by a female teacher” startled me because upon reflection I find that I am personally guilty of this resistance (125). In examining my past educational experiences, I find that there are many instances where I have devalued a female educator as not fit for the subject area. In high school, I was very skeptical of both of my female math teachers whereas I always felt that I learned a great deal from my male algebra teacher. Later, in my undergraduate career, I often chose male literature professors because I felt that they were more engaging, and I think perhaps on a subconscious level I felt that they were more qualified.
This is a shocking realization for me to make now, particularly as my own professional goal has always centered on teaching literature at the college level. It is beyond ironic that I have not extended the same responsiveness and respect towards my own sex that I certainly would hope to generate in the future. Moreover, I have always prided myself on my own feminist philosophies and ideals and it is frightening that I was not even aware of own dismissal of feminine power in the classroom until after I read Jarrett’s piece. I feel that if feminist teachers make it their business to inform students on the underlying instances of sexism in and outside of the classroom, they will be performing an invaluable service. While I believe that it is not the job of an educator to change a student’s values, I feel that it is essential to provide our students with all the information.
|
-
|
I woke up this morning and for the first time since I moved to Florida, I was not excited about the time change. You see, I'm from one of the very few states in the Union that does not recognize Daylight Savings Time (Arizona...woo!). Therefore, every year when we "fall back," I am still fascinated and pumped that I essentially get to live the same hour twice. It's always been my own personal take on time travel. Is it ridiculous and illogical? Yes. Does it make me a little bit crazy? Yes. Is it my favorite event of the year? Double yes. That is, it was my favorite event of the year until 2006. Why, you ask?
Maybe I'm blue because of the C+ I gave to a student who really does try. I know what many of you will say, "A seventy-nine is still an average grade...hey, it's almost above average." While I can certainly accept that as intelligent reasoning, it still doesn't quite help me erase the look on his face or the frustrated (and oh-so-resigned) sigh he let out as he saw his grade. I know we don't grade on effort. I know that we simply can't. But I also know that I really, really want to.
I might also be a little blue because I've had to recently accept that I need deadlines. After all my years of grumbling and telling myself that deadlines were simply markers for teachers with no sympathy or soul, I've now come to the point where I'm floundering. Teaching, learning, working. The endless cycle makes it impossible for me to remember which understanding graduate professor "just wants it in when it's done," or which one has due dates but "works with you." It makes me want to cry a little bit inside to admit this, but I need a due date. Not a tentative, not a proposed, but an actual "get it in or your done" deadline.
So there it is. I'm a griping, self-indulgent, wanna-be time traveler who thrives on due dates. What a sad portrait of a graduate student I've become! But...I'm a graduate student and that is someone I've wanted to be at least as long as I've known about Daylight Savings Time. I guess I will just have to suck it up, learn to juggle, and wait for next year.
|
-
|
In reading over the annotated bibliographies, I was encouraged by the wealth of information that our class has accumulated through this assignment. I think that there has been a great effort made to provide articles that are relevant to our practicum and also useful in our instruction. This is certainly true of the first annotation I read today. This particular annotation was provided by Jamie Kinsley. She chose to annotate Fred Arroyo's piece, "Models of Authority: So the Spell Cannot be Broken."
I appreciated Jamie's annotation because rather than merely restating the main points of her article, she related the material to the ENC 1101 memoir project. In her summary, Jamie highlighted three concepts: relating through composition, communicating through composition and learning through experience. Jamie makes a wonderful connection in applying these concepts to the memoir as they are the hoped-for outcome of the project and reflective writing in general. Moreover, Jamie demonstrates that Arroyo's concepts encompass the field of composition as a whole by including Arroyo's theory of language as more than mere words. While this is certainly not a new theory in our community, Arroyo's call for responsibility among composition instructors is refreshing and inspiring. Arroyo's assertion that "it is through composition that humans learn that they are not alone" leaves little room to argue the significance of communication and composition in our society. The idea that language and communication connect society on an intuitive level makes the development of these so much more important. As vital elements of society, the role of the educator must be to enhance natural communication. Personally, I feel that this ideology gives me a new sense of respect and responsibility for my position in the classroom.
|
-
|
Now that I have gotten past my first-year teaching jitters and worked out the kinks with the class computer, I am now having another issue. I am very concerned about grading. I remember that many of us had very different standards for grading when we were taking the training course in August. As the practicum progresses, I've discovered that this issue still hasn't been resolved. I find that many of my peers in Practicum are much tougher than I am. For the first exercises, I have been grading primarily on a participation basis. I did not grade the FYC assessment as I thought we were not supposed to give feedback on it, and I have been grading the in-class writing solely for content. As we move into the memoir assignment, I am now very concerned that I will not be able to provide the "correct" grade for each paper. In Contemporary Comp. today, there was a discussion concerning a student's paper. As it was read aloud, I could understand what the student was saying and I made the connections myself for the portions of the paper that were unclear. I find that throughout my career I have always done this. I know (or assume) what the writer is trying to say and just mentally edit the paper to achieve that meaning. Because of this, I am very worried that in reading my students' papers I will skim many of their errors and the grades will not reflect their efforts. This is not fair to my students as they will enter 1102 without a proper evaluation of their abilities. If there are any suggestions to help me work on this problem, I would appreciate any and all feedback. This is my first year and I will certainly defer to experience in this matter.
|
-
Today in my ENC 1101 class, I asked my students to use their in-class writing time to tell me about their memories and reflections on September 11, 2001. I felt that it was particularly apt given that today is the five year anniversary of the tragedy. I also wanted to know what they had felt and how the experience had shaped them. Personally, I was a freshman in college when the attacks took place. I still remember the day with surprising clarity. Oddly enough, I left my 8 a.m. English II class and walked to my dorm. It was a beautiful, sunny day. I still can't believe what a perfect morning it was. As I made my way up to my floor, I found my two friends watching the television in the common room. They were both shocked because they'd just seen a plane "accidentally" hit the first tower. We stood in disbelief as we watched the second plane hit. It was a strange moment for all of us, I think, like seeing time actually stop. As the day progressed, we watched the coverage unfold, including all of the horrific aftermath. By the end of the day there were over a hundred of us crammed into the common room, huddled around the television. I have always felt like that day was a defining point for my generation and graduating class, but I've also always wondered how it must have felt to experience that day as a younger person. I suppose that was the main factor in choosing this as topic for our in-class writing.
I was particularly struck by the startling memories that my students expressed. Many of them remember the day as clearly as I do, with poignant personal memories attached to the experience. I was surprised to find out how many students' teachers showed the attacks unfold on their classroom televisions. I suppose that I'd always just assumed that those younger than I am were somehow guarded from the events and only received a vague retelling by their parents. In reading over their responses, I found that they were also stripped of the veneer of innocence that I had also clung to before the events of that day. While it may not be the most academic topic to write on, I'm glad that I asked my students to share their experiences with me as I feel that it creates a commonality that might not otherwise exist.
|
-
|
In reading over "Freshman English, Composition, and CCCC," I find that there is much in the article to inspire and frustrate. As a first-year instructor, it is extremely interesting to gain an understanding of the origination of the concept of Freshman composition as a unique course. Throughout our training, I was often struck by the fact that the job required of us had little or nothing to do with my own notions of being a college instructor. I suppose that comes of being a product of the "common enemy." In my undergraduate work, I was certainly taught by those professors that "placed literature as an unquestionable center of value" and "who could demonstrate acceptable ways of using and responding to those texts, as the primary representative of English." (41) In fact, this is the only concept of college English that I had been exposed to prior to my training for the FYC program. It is enlightening to know that there is an entire organization (an extremely large and well-funded organization according to Bartholomae) dedicated to sorting through and solving the unique issues that result from the special requirements of Freshman Composition and Communication. While the debate surrounding these issues seems to be never-ending, the CCCC creates a genuine community for all involved in the argument.
It is the eternal argument on the proper "guidelines" for Freshman composition that I find to be particularly frustrating. In Bartholomae's words, "I am continually amazed, however, by the degree to which we speak and write as though we had control of the rhetorical tradition--as though it were ours and we could name its key figures and projects." (46) I think that this identifies the biggest problem in composition. It is the fact that there is no control over the course, and this is a fact that eliminates the ability to create a standard set of rules and principles to be followed. I find this to be true even in our community at USF. While we are certainly expected to fulfill certain department requirements, the teaching styles and goals of the instructors are so widely varied that it is inevitable that we will reach different conclusions. And while I may feel that the lack of a definitive outcome is taxing on a new instructor, it does not follow that these differences are bad. As Bartholomae states, it is a "way of defining maturity." (48) I will conclude with his words as I feel that they are the most inspiring in the article, "We are so many, we offer such a rich variety of voices and projects, we have established our niche in academe." (48) Although this niche may combine a variety of conflicting ideas, it is wonderful to belong to a community that is continually striving to communicate these theories with a beneficial end in mind.
|
-
I have officially finished my first week as an instructor in the FYC program. I have to admit that my experience hardly qualifies as a success. I feel that I was under prepared. I believe that this was, in large part, due to the fact that I have been unable to access my blackboard account due to registration issues. This has severely limited the amount and quality of information that I have been able to share with my students concerning our course. I am now wondering if I will be able to regain control of the direction of the class. I hope to incorporate some of the strategies and philosophies that I will undoubtedly pick up from our required practicum observation hours, but I am worried that it may be too late for this particular group of students. I am concerned that because I was not able to engage them as I had envisioned, they will be turned off by the class and choose to underperform. I don't want them to view ENC 1101 as a mere requirement for graduation; I would like them to actually learn something and mature as writers. I would appreciate any suggestions anyone may have as to how I can accomplish this given my rocky beginning. I feel that the next session is particularly important to convince my students that I do, in fact, have something to offer the class. I am trusting that my technological difficulties will be ironed out by then, and I'm hoping that once they see that I have put a lot of effort into the course design it will push them to take the course seriously. I welcome any and all input on this topic.
|
|
|
|