-
FYC Goals: From Theory to Application
From Theory to Application . . . The pendulum is swinging, and with each tick of the clock, I find myself getting closer and closer to that first moment of comprehension — the one where I face twenty-six incoming freshman students that are as apprehensive of taking a writing course as I am teaching it for the first time. Did I design my curriculum to best meet the needs of my students? Are my learning outcomes in line with the course objectives? Are my assignment guidelines structured in a format that facilitates both clarity and cohesiveness? Is the sequencing and scaffolding design of the semester’s assignments logically chronological? As Teresa Redd references, “Talkin bout Fire Don’t Boil the Pot” (146). In other words, studying composition pedagogy may prepare me for understanding the needs of students, and may offer direction on how to best design the course, but all of this does not TEACH the students WRITING; hence, this is where the professor’s role comes into play.
After months of trying to absorb as much as I can researching different theoretical pedagogical perspectives, I now begin the process of mapping out assignments while considering the fundamental takeaways I feel are most critical to incorporate. Several takeaways stand out to me in the readings for this week and are highlighted below:
Audience Matters . . . Diversity in Writing. - Diversity in writing – “To develop students’ rhetorical knowledge and sense of authorship so that they can adapt writing to different purposes, audiences, and contexts” (Redd 147).
Coming from an occupational field outside of academia, I genuinely understand the need for students to be able to transfer writing skills from an academic to an applied setting. Learning how to write for audiences outside of the college classroom is something all students should be exposed to. Upon graduation, students may be tasked with various genres of writing: professional emails, corporate marketing, newspaper articles, social media postings, and for some, creative writing.
Writing for knowledge . . . - We write to learn – “ . . . writing enables us to think in ways that are virtually impossible without writing because we can reflect upon our thoughts more easily when we can see and preserve them” (Redd 148).
I have seen this scenario play out daily while working in the KSU writing center. Sometimes, students will come into the writing center and feel overwhelmed by the task at hand. In this situation, after carefully reviewing the professor’s assignment guidelines, I will begin the freewriting and/or brainstorming process. Often times, students will start to develop a structure or pattern based solely upon what they have written in these brainstorming sessions. I associate this process directly with “we write to learn” — we don’t know what we know until we write it. Furthermore, students recognize the fact they DO know something about what they would like to write.
Identifying your process is key . . . - Writing is a process – “We cannot truly teach writing without teaching the process of writing, for it is the development of flexible processes that will enable students to fulfill the wide range of writing tasks they will encounter in the university and beyond” (Redd 149).
As I have previously discussed in one of my recent blog posts, I believe teaching the processes of writing is very paramount in students’ success of not just freshman-level English composition, but I believe it is fundamental in helping students write BEYOND the current assignment. I met with a student just yesterday that has always enjoyed writing and has had great success in writing. For some reason, the current assignment was overwhelming them to the point they had writer’s block. I immediately began talking to the student to try and identify “processes” they had relied upon and typically used throughout the years that had seemed to work. Within a matter of a few moments, the student was writing again, which wasn’t due to anything I said other than encouraging them to draw upon their “processes.”
Genres of Writing . . . - Understanding different genres of writing – “Conventions make it easier for readers to comprehend a text, in large part because conventions fulfill readers’ expectations” (Redd 150).
Not only do students need exposure to writing across different genres for various types of audiences, but they also need to learn and understand the concept of genres and why they exist. For example, the characteristics of a personal email are quite different compared to the audiences’ expectations of a professional email. For one, professional emails typically require the writer to formally introduce themselves, persuade or inform their audience of a specific event/need, and request a call to action. Usually, none of those characteristics mentioned above would need to be included in a personal email. If students haven’t been introduced to various genres of writing, they won’t understand the needs and expectations of writing within those specific spaces.
Multimodality in Writing . . . - Multimodal writing – “To be truly literate, students need to choose appropriate technology for their role, purpose, and audience . . . At the same time, students need to incorporate technology to save time, paper, and energy” (Redd 151).
Multimodal writing is prevalent in today’s society, and I suspect it isn’t disappearing any time soon. If anything, it is here to stay. Understanding the prescriptive guidelines in multimodal writing and expression will help students identify and align with their intended audiences. For example, having students write a research essay on a topic of choice teaches and reinforces field research. Once the essay is completed, professors could have students compose a multimodal assignment (blog post, travel brochure, etc.) incorporating the same research as incorporated into the essay. This type of assignment would aid students in understanding how the same information can be presented in a multimodal and multidimensional environment.
Works Cited
Altmann, Gerd. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/illustrations/tutor-coach-teacher-manager-407361/.
Altmann, Gerd. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/illustrations/puzzle-planning-strategy-process-1686920/.
Altmann, Gerd. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/illustrations/social-social-media-communication-3064515/.
Free-Photos. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/audience-crowd-people-persons-828584/.
Iqbal, Mudassar. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/illustrations/webdesign-design-web-website-3411373/.
OpenClipart-Vectors. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/vectors/hand-pencil-pen-edit-eraser-write-160538/.
Reed, Teresa. “Talkin bout Fire Don’t Boil the Pot: Putting Theory into Practice in a First-Year Writing Course at an HBCU.” First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice, edited by Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford, Parlor Press, 2014, pp. 146-166.
-
The Pedagogy of Scaffolding
How do the pieces connect? One of the biggest challenges I believe teachers face is bridging the gap between theoretical pedagogy and application. Haven’t we all heard sayings such as: “why do I need this?”, “I won’t use this ever again,” “this has nothing to do with my major,” “this is something that doesn’t happen in the ‘real world.’” As a student myself, I am not far removed from these mumblings that students whisper in the hallways. However, switching hats, so to speak, lends a newfound appreciation for the task that college professors face daily — how to convert theory into practice in an applied setting that “bridges the gap” for students. Put simply, the process of not just analyzing pedagogical theory, but the practice of dissecting its roots and integrating those roots into instruction. Let’s discuss this process!
The Sweetland Center for Writing at the University of Michigan put forth an article titled Effective Assignment Sequencing for Scaffolding Learning. To date, this has been the most beneficial article that I have read on providing concrete examples of assignments and processes that teachers and professors can implement. Studying the reasoning behind scaffolding assignments is a long way from learning how to take the conceptual theory of WHY we (professors) scaffold assignments and HOW to scaffold assignments. Interestingly enough, I am thrilled to report that as I read through the suggestions of low stakes to high stakes assignments, I found myself smiling; it was almost as though I could anticipate what was to come next. Why? Well, because I have discovered that the “theory” I am studying is something I am already MOST familiar with because my professors have and continue to use the same structure on me!!!
All writers have more to learn! So, giving you a chance a catch-up, or, rather, giving myself a chance to breathe, let’s look at that last statement, again. Yes, the same suggested methods of scaffolding used in Sweetland’s article are the same methods that my instructors have used to help us (my cohort) understand, learn, absorb, and comprehend the material being presented in class. As Sweetland suggests, “each assignment practices old skills and provides new skills students will also need to finish the next assignment” (par. 3). Several key items struck me and are concepts that I plan to incorporate in the near future while designing an English 1101 coursework portfolio. These items are listed below, and comparisons are made as to how I plan to utilize them next semester.
- Simple to complex: Yes, it seems simple, but isn’t always practiced in classroom pedagogy. We have all had that “course” where we jump into a large project and frantically begin googling anything we can find on “how to.” I strongly feel this shouldn’t be the case. As professors, we should be “scaffolding” our assignments to begin with simple aspects of the overall project and working our way up to more complex elements affiliated with the project/assignment. For example, having students “. . . practice summarizing course readings before they attempt to analyze them” is a simple to complex practice mentioned in the Sweetland article (par. 2).
- Revision is key: Yes, this is a thresholds concept we studied last semester. According to Sweetland, “Built-in, low stakes revision activities also have the benefit of undermining common bad habits by positioning writing as more than the typical two-stage drafting process . . .” This is something I can most definitely attest to after working in the KSU writing center. Often times, students come into the center on their first or second draft wanting to “proofread” their papers. The process of revision seems to escape many students. I believe giving students some type of course credit for the “revising” portion of their assignment will enable them to begin bridging a gap between “I’m done” to “let’s review this again.” As I have seen in the writing center, initially, students are keener on considering revision when there are points assigned to the process.
- Practice engaging the material: Yes, I, too, have complained about discussion board postings in some of my graduate courses. Sometimes they feel like “busy work” at first glance. However, I have found that what I thought was “read this and leave some specific thoughts about it” turned into genuinely beginning to understand and work with the ideas found within those articles to build upon the next assignment. For example, an assignment in one of my courses was to read a few chapters on English dialects in various United States’ regions. Although it was interesting, the material was very dense, and I found myself losing intimate details as I left one region and began another; in other words, my retention of the content was challenging at best. But the next assignment expanded the same concept into international regions and the differences within English dialects in those areas. Without a doubt, the research I completed for different dialects of English within the U.S. helped me to understand the material I was researching for international dialects.
- Pre-Writing Assignments: Yes, many students shudder at the concept of pre-writing. “I don’t outline” is something I have heard many times while working in the writing center. For some reason, there appears to be a negative connotation with the term “outline.” I’m not sure if this is due to mandatory practices in previous courses, but I believe you could describe the same process as outlining but term it something else, such as “mapping,” and students would offer a more positive response. Sweetland suggests a project proposal design that “ . . . provide an opportunity for students to articulate what they want to accomplish with a project as well as generate feedback from you and/or from their peers” (par. 8). Structurally, the project proposal directive enables students to “brainstorm” without realizing they are “brainstorming.” It also gives students the ability to create a mental “outline” without having to produce a traditional “outline.” I would suggest it is virtually impossible to write/draft a project proposal without (at least mentally) working out the “blueprint” of what, where, how, why, and when the project will need/address.
Below is a video by Texas A & M University Writing Center that gives some very helpful tips students can use for the pre-writing process:
Pre-writing for success! While I could probably go one for pages yet to come, I want to wrap this blog post up by saying the most influential takeaway from the Sweetland article, for me, is the concept of reflective writing. For years I have written whatever came to mind at the time when needed to draft an assignment or essay. It wasn’t until this past semester in graduate school that reflective writing was introduced to me. At first, I found it quite challenging to express the reasons behind the rhetorical choices I made in essay composition. Once I fumbled through the first few paragraphs, I realized that by reflecting on my writing style and the choices I made in writing enabled me to write more expressively in future draftings. Stated another way, as a writer, once I began to identify “why” I wrote “what” I wrote, I was then able to make more deliberate statements that tend to be more powerful and provide better clarity. As always, ALL writers have more to learn, and by utilizing the method of self-reflection, I hope my writing continues to improve and delivery enhanced. Sweetland breaks the reflection component down to the following three sectors (par. 12):
- Changes they’ve made to their final draft
- Why and how they made those changes
- What those changes demonstrate about their thinking/writing development
Rome wasn’t built in a day . . . Final takeaway — the cliché Rome wasn’t built in a day applies to many facets in life, writing included! Before learning sentence structures, students must learn vocabulary. Before learning essay construction, students must learn paragraph construction. Integrating low stakes to high stakes writing in the composition classroom, known as scaffolding assignments, will provide students with a better understanding of not only WHY they are completing an assignment or project, but will also help bridge the gap between theory and practice. When a student understands why they are completing a task and reflects on the choices they made, the likelihood they are able to transfer those same skills to other facets in life is more likely.
Works Cited
B., Thomas, Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/strommast-power-generation-4459235/.
“Brainstorming.” YouTube, uploaded 8 March 2016 by Tamuwritingcenter, youtube.com/watch?v=HSufG-AIQYo.
“Effective Assignment Sequencing for Scaffolding Learning.” Sweetland Center for Writing, University of Michigan, lsa.umich.edu/sweetland/instructors/teaching-resources/sequencing-and-scaffolding-assignments.html. Accessed 4 February 2020.
OpenClipart-Vectors, Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/vectors/colosseum-italy-romans-rome-ruin-1296587/.
Vasek, Jan, Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/laptop-woman-education-study-young-3087585/.
-
Journal Prewriting for Academic Success
Writing about Writing This week’s reading focuses on rhetorical situations and the types of activities that could be implemented in the first-year composition classroom to aid students in making real-world connections. Reading through the components of Aristotle’s primary modes of analysis (ethos, pathos, logos), the concept of prewriting caught my eye — it is something that I strongly identify with in my own writing process and something that I discuss with students that visit the campus writing center for tutoring sessions. As I mentioned in last week’s post, writing about writing (WAW) is a theory of pedagogy that I intend to incorporate in my classroom next fall. Put simply, teaching the methods and modes of the writing process itself will be my main focus.
According to Lunsford et al., “ . . . prewrite by assessing your writing (that is, rhetorical) situation, asking ourselves questions such as the following: Who is my audience? What does the audience expect of me? What do I already know about this subject? What must I find out? How can I best arrange my information and ideas? How much time do I have? How long should the composition be?” (90). The simple questions that many writers ask themselves as they begin to compose are rhetorical in nature, even though, often students and writers don’t consider them as part of a “prewriting” process. When many students hear “prewriting” (myself included during my undergraduate years), they think of “outlining.” Prewriting can consist of many different tactics and styles to include freewriting, focused freewriting, dance boxes (which is a type of word association technique), keyword blast, etc. As Lunsford et al. further states, “Encourage your students to respond to these questions by ‘thinking with a pencil in hand,’ jotting down ideas in their writing logs” (90 – 91).
Writing Journal Sometimes it only takes ONE keyword to bring forth a whole slue or landslide of ideas. In this case, it took me two words — writing logs — in the quote mentioned above to realize another practice I want to implement in my composition classroom next fall: writing journals. Since my primary pedagogy will be student-centered and revolve around the WAW concept, I want to implement processes that will aid students in being and feeling more successful in their writing, not only for this class but for many courses and professions in the future. By designing the curriculum to include processes, such as a writing journal, and freewriting activities, such as freewriting/brainstorming, my hope is students will become accustomed to a formalized process that will aid them in writing assignments yet to come. In other words, the primary methods behind a completed essay are the practices I want to strengthen and highlight for students. Below is a short video that describes the process of keeping a writing journal:
Journaling for Success As I mentioned above, part of the goal in teaching a process-oriented approach for English Composition is to not only prepare students for future academic essays and assignments but to also prepare them for writing in professional careers. Douglas Hesse references four separate types of “domain” writing when determining how to structure a course: academic (genres of the academy with a particular emphasis on . . . thesis and support), civic (writing to influence opinions and decisions in public realms), vocational (genres used to transact work in business and professional settings), and aesthetic (writing to create engaging artifacts from memoirs to poems to literary essays). While Hesse acknowledges a thorough submersion of the four types of writing mentioned would be difficult at best in a fifteen-week course (49-50), I feel as though exposing students to the different genres of writing is of equal importance. Academic emersion is a given since students will compose narratives, research papers, and essays throughout their college years. Civic writing is something students may or may not be exposed to depending upon their specific degree of choice. By utilizing an argumentative essay assignment to incorporate the use of rhetorical appeals (ethos, pathos, logos, kairos) with topics involving civic discourse, students will have the opportunity to experience two distinctly different genre writing styles into one essay assignment; in other words, students will have the chance to multi-task in the composition classroom.
In summary, this week’s readings brought forth a lot of “brainstorming” and “direct focus” for me in regards to considering not only how to implement writing about writing strategies into the course but also how to also expose students to various genres of writing without having to assign an overabundance of assignments. By strategically pairing process and content, my hopes are to prepare students for writing beyond my classroom.
Works Cited
Anson, Chris M. “Writing, Language, and Literacy.” First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice, edited by Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford, Parlor Press, 2014, pp. 3-19.
Coxwell-Teague, Deborah, and Ronald F. Lunsford, editors. First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice. Parlor Press, 2014.
“Essay Writing for University: Starting a Journal.” YouTube, uploaded by Wendy Davis, 5 December 2011, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSb6qZXeqcA.
Gerd, Altmann. Pixabay, 2020, https://pixabay.com/illustrations/puzzle-planning-strategy-process-1686918/.
Hesse, Douglas. “Occasions, Sources, and Strategies.” First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice, edited by Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford, Parlor Press, 2014, pp. 49-66.
Lunsford, Andrea, Jeanne Law Bohannon, Alyssa O’Brien, and Lisa Dresdner. Teaching with Lunsford Handbooks. 3rd ed. Bedford/St. Martin’s: 2019.
Pexels. Pixabay, 2020, https://pixabay.com/photos/arm-hand-desk-notebook-pen-1284248/.
-
Dialectal Differences: Texas and New Orleans, Louisiana
Texas As a creative writer and soon to be instructor of English Composition, understanding and acknowledging the variations among the usage of “American” English is beneficial from multiple facets. With so much diversity, culture, and history intertwined throughout the numerous versions of American Dialect, it would behoove creative writers to study and research specific dialects written and spoken in settings used for fictional scenes, such as historical fiction. In other words, if I am writing a fiction novel that takes place in Texas, understanding the lexical and phonological differences of the written and spoken dialect in Texas will support a more realistic and encompassing experience for readers.
As a teacher of American English Composition, having an awareness of some of the dialectal differences will help me focus more on “process-method” instruction and less on “sentence-structure/word usage method” instruction. In other words, realizing that dialects of American English utilize different names for the same “item” would be necessary from a grading and teaching perspective. For example, Texas has always manifested a strong Hispanic cultural influence, and as Bailey and Tillery point out, “Lexical items like frijoles, olla, arroyo, and remuda reflect not only the relatively large number of Hispanics in the areas but also the importance of Mexican American culture in the development of a distinct Texas Culture” (39).
New Orleans, Louisiana New Orleans, Louisiana (NOLA), is another city/state known to be a hub of distinct southern culture that exhibits lexical uniqueness: alligator pear is another name for an avocado; lost bread is another name for french toast; flying horses represent a carousel (Eble 45). NOLA is also accredited to having three separate dialects based upon class, color, and neighborhood known as uptown white, Yat (downtown white), and black (46). Understanding the characteristics of these NOLA dialects would be imperative for authenticity in creative writing. Lexical variances between American English dialects can cause confusion when communicating with others (whether written or spoken); it reminds me of the video we watched in class of the students representing various countries. Grading a paper that references a “flying horse” may cause confusion or reading about an alligator pear in a student essay — as an instructor, I wouldn’t make the connection.
EX: On the warm summer day, I strolled around the park, taking notice of the flying horses. On a warm summer day, I strolled around the park, taking notice of the carousel.
Works Cited
Bailey, Guy, and Jan Tillery. “The Lone Star State of Speech (Texas).” American Voices, edited by Wolfram, Walt and Ben Ward, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006, pp. 36-41.
Eble, Connie. “Speaking the Big Easy (New Orleans, LA).” American Voices, edited by Wolfram, Walt and Ben Ward, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006, pp. 42-48.
Mark, David. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/texas-ranch-entrance-fence-1581881/.
Skeeze. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/mardi-gras-new-orleans-festival-1176483/.
Wolfram, Walt, and Ben Ward, editors. American Voices. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006.
-
American English Dialectal Differences
Charleston, South Carolina Charleston, South Carolina, is known today for its sense of southern charm, hospitality, ghostly hauntings, and uniqueness. The first permanent English community was established in native Catawba and Cherokee inhabited territory. European settlers constructed vast plantations and began harvesting crops for sustainability, while African slaves provided workforce labor representing the majority population (Baranowski 30). The distinctive dialect of the white upper-class Charlestonians is partly due to interactions with Gullah, the dialect spoken by the African slaves (31). Charlestonian dialect remains distinct due to “. . . its unique combination of features and to the sources of these traits” (30).
One of these unique aspects of traditional Charlestonian accent is vowel pronunciation. Vowels are “produced by maintaining the quality of the first vowel element throughout the syllable (the vowel of dead in day and that of bought in go); they are monophthongs” (Baranowski 31). This is also known by linguists as “ingliding vowels.” In the Charlestonian version, “the tongue is closer to the roof of the mouth, not unlike the vowels in bee and boo” (32). This ingliding pronunciation of the vowels is not found in any other American English dialect, except for Gullah (32).
Ohio Known as the heartland of America, Ohio presents a division of dialectic variations (due to migration route influences) that can be broken out into three separate geographic locations: Northern, Central, and Southern Ohio. Collectively, the various dialects exemplified throughout Ohio were influenced by speech patterns of Northern England and Scottish-Irish variety (Flanigan 119-121). Southern Ohio featured bilingual schools of English and German, creating a dialectal influence of the German language (122).
While Northern Ohio dialect keeps the pronunciation of vowels distinct (known as Northern Cities Shift), such as the differences heard between cot and caught, in Central Ohio pronunciation, “rounded back vowel is essentially lost” (Flanigan 121). Traditional Charlestonian dialect distinguished a difference in the pronunciation of the vowels in cot and caught, similar to the Northern Ohio dialect, while “the youngest speakers do not distinguish between the vowels in these words: they hear them as the same and pronounce them identically” (Baranowski 34). Southern Ohio features distinct lexical forms, such as “you’uns,” that share commonality with Appalachia (Flanigan 121).
American English Dialectal Differences Both Charleston, SC, and Ohio, showcase settlers’ cultural influences in both spoken and written language. However, as embodied in the “Northern Cities vowel shift in Cleveland and Toledo, the cot/caught merger in Columbus, and South Midland with a touch of Kentucky in Cincinnati,” and the “Pin/pen, him/hem, and sinned/send” (Flanigan 123; Baranowski 34) word pairs, dialects blend, merge, and evolve with time and exposure to outside influences.
Works Cited
Baranowski, Maciej. “Doing the Charleston (South Carolina).” American Voices, edited by Wolfram, Walt and Ben Ward, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006, pp. 29-35.
Flanigan, Beverly Olson. “Different Ways of Talking in the Buckeye State (Ohio).” American Voices, edited by Wolfram, Walt and Ben Ward, Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006, pp. 118-123).
Jovanovic, Biljana. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/english-english-language-language-2724442/.
Stelmaszek, Don. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/charleston-south-carolina-bridges-2343974/.
Sturgell, William. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/photos/barn-rustic-barns-ohio-digital-art-2686500/.
Wolfram, Walt, and Ben Ward, editors. American Voices. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., 2006.
-
Interactive Compositional Classrooms
Active Learning One of the courses I am taking this semester focuses on compositional pedagogy in high school and college settings. As I prepare to enter an English 1101 classroom next fall as part of my graduate-level training, I am beginning to strengthen and hone in on my philosophical approach. Each week consists of required readings and analysis of those readings to include “takeaways.” As a student, sometimes it seems like an over-abundance of information while searching for the needle in a haystack, so to speak, or rather, the fundamental components of classroom pedagogy that resonate in some way with one’s perceived educational platform. However, that moment when you read something that seems to vibrate on a frequency so profound that you want to shout with excitement, is, well, EXCITING!
Discovering Your Frequency Chris M. Anson’s discussion found in chapter one of First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice is one such piece for me. Anson discusses a pedagogical approach known as WAW (Writing About Writing – see video below), which defines and addresses writing as a process. Following the WAW approach, the focus is less about the ability to write and more “ . . . on thinking about the thinking that writing involves . . .” Anson further states, “Developing ‘mindfulness’ and meta-cognitive awareness becomes one of the most important aims . . .” (5).
Wardle and Downs (WAW) Any many of you know, last semester involved studying Adler-Kassner and Wardle’s threshold concepts from Naming What We Know, specifically, threshold concept five: Writing is (Also Always) a Cognitive Activity. As I read through Anson’s excerpt, I found myself shaking my head, yes! over and over. Anson structures his classroom to feature “extensive, low-stakes and reflective writings” (6). This process of giving students many opportunities to participate in “low-stakes” writing is something I most definitely want to incorporate in the classroom. I feel as though “de-stigmatizing” the process of writing is essential for students to become comfortable with approaching writing as a process —not something that is easy for those that enjoy writing but a process that writers of all levels can use to develop the skill.
I believe just about every college student has experienced the “PowerPoint lecture” classroom design that seems to go on for eternity. No matter how awake you may feel or how artistically designed the presentation may be, the lights dim, and the eyes get heavy. The advancement of classroom technology and the emergence of digital course discussion boards demand a change in how the class time is structured. When I read Anson’s “course delivery reversal” (CDR) (10) design, I wanted to jump up and down. Instead of professors spending the entire class period lecturing in front of the students, Anson takes an interactive approach. Presentations can be posted to the online digital boards, and students then have the opportunity to engage, discuss, and learn through interactive projects. My goal is to incorporate this same type of pedagogy in my English composition classroom. Since writing is known to be a social and rhetorical activity, the more time students spend conversing, the more enhanced the process of writing will become. Below is a video where Anson discusses the importance of this concept in regards to interaction between teachers and students in the field of writing.
Chris Anson – 2013 CCCC Convention Interview Works Cited
Adler-Kassner, Linda, and Elizabeth Wardle, editors. Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition. Utah State University Press, 2016.
Anson, Chris M. “Writing, Language, and Literacy.” First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice, edited by Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford, Parlor Press, 2014, pp. 3-19.
“Chris Anson – 2013 CCCC Convention Interview.” YouTube, uploaded by NCTEvideo, 19 March 2013, youtube.com/watch?v=Bd12JROKWJ4.
Clker-Free-Vector-Images. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/vectors/teachers-meeting-books-reading-23820/.
Coxwell-Teague, Deborah, and Ronald F. Lunsford, editors. First-Year Composition: From Theory to Practice. Parlor Press, 2014.
Geralt. Pixabay, 2020, pixabay.com/illustrations/banner-header-person-silhouette-997373/.
“Meet the Authors of Writing About Writing.” YouTube, uploaded by Macmillan Learning, 1 November 2014, youtube.com/watch?v=UDyPE2IMD68.
-
Student-Centered Holistic Teaching Philosophy
Writing is a Social and Rhetorical Activity . . . All Writers Have More to Learn One of my most rewarding experiences as a graduate teaching assistant in the Master of Arts in Professional Writing program at Kennesaw State University has been the evolution of self. Giving and sharing part of yourself with others requires great focus and reflection of not only where you are but where you have been. Looking back from this reflective contextual framework, I re-read a quote of mine that has now come to full fruition, “Writing, like life, is a series of events and experiences that lead the writer to traverse different paths. Often times, this exploratory process remains in the shadows, out of sight, and unbeknownst to each writer” (Grant, “Writing: Know Yourself”). At the time this blog post was written, I was completely submerged in the very process I was mentioning. Looking back now, at the end of the semester, I realize how fundamental those words have been in shaping my underlying philosophical methods of teaching.
I began the master’s program this fall in hopes of one day becoming a successful professor of writing. The most eye-opening experience to date has been the realization that what works best for students, also works best for instructors. There is no magical one-size-fits-all when it comes to the teaching of writing. There is no magical one-size-fits-all classroom pedagogy and most definitely no one-size-fits-all student learning process. The one major takeaway from not only this course, Understanding Writing as a Process, but also from my experience across the graduate-level curriculum, is that learning should be a holistic and student-centered experience. I believe the purpose of education is to provide knowledge and tools from which students can use as a springboard for learning. As stated in a previous blog post, “the foundational approach to this style of instruction is concerned with the student’s ‘whole self’” (Grant, “Perseverance”).
It is in this basic premise that I foster my teaching philosophy — that I am a facilitator of learning only. It is not my intention or my goal to tell students the “right way” to write. Instead, I want to provide them training and education in English composition so that they may grow and blossom in their own writing styles. In other words, I hope to provide the foundational materials necessary to gain confidence, skills, and classroom experiences that will enable students to pursue their unique paths. Writing is a part of every aspect of life, and no two people have the exact same style. I want students to expand their classroom learning experiences and develop personal and individual writing abilities as well as strengthen communication skills from those said experiences. Empowering others through the sharing of knowledge is very important to me. Helping foster confidence and expressivity of self through writing composition is the framework from which I have built and will continue to develop my classroom pedagogy.
Student-Teacher Goals Students learn best by practice and hands-on experience. Memorizing and studying are necessary methods of learning retention, but learning through personal experience creates a stronger cognitive bond. Incorporating a student-centered approach is essential as not all students will present at the same juncture in their learning journey. By meeting students where they are academically, as a professor, I can then help promote confidence in the writing process. Overwhelming students and applying a one-size-fits-all framework will lead to insecurity and wilting of the blossoming process described above. My goals as a professor are as follows: to teach and foster writing habits that can be adopted across the curriculum; to teach the mechanics behind what can make writing powerful. In other words, my goal is to not only help students adapt various types of writing styles depending upon the end-user but to also teach them ways in which to make their writing present as more powerful to the intended reader. Ultimately, the utility of writing is a mode of communication. Therefore, learning strategic ways of self-expression through the written medium will only enhance communication skills, as well as strengthen written and multimodal rhetoric.
My teaching philosophy is based heavily on Linda Adler-Kassner and Elizabeth Wardle’s classroom edition of Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies. This semester, as a small cohort, we studied the five threshold concepts of writing pedagogy, and I found myself intrigued and supportive of two main points to include: all writers have more to learn and writing is a social and rhetorical activity. These two concepts alone represent the groundwork from which I will base my classroom instruction. Similarly, I had the opportunity to shadow Dr. Amy Sandefur’s English 1101 course for a syllabus analysis project and was able to witness these concepts being implemented in her pedagogical approach. Because these concepts are so paramount in my teaching philosophy, I would like to discuss each one individually.
Revision is key to successful writing All writers have more to learn. Such a short statement, yet so very profound in the instruction of composition. As a graduate teaching assistant at the Kennesaw State University writing center, I have had the opportunity to meet with students from various academic levels, from college freshmen through doctoral thesis work. Regardless of the writing abilities or educational level of writing, all students benefit from revising their work. Countless times I have experienced meeting one-on-one with a student that felt as though they were only in the writing center to make final line editing “proofreading” changes in their essay. However, after reviewing the assignment guidelines, reading through the polished essay, and discussing areas where global and local changes could be incorporated, students typically leave with self-directed modifications that lead to further revision. Through the revising process, students learn to view their writing not as an author, but as a reader. With each revision brings greater rhetorical focus and more targeted communication.
Writing is a Social and Rhetorical Activity . . . Writing is a social and rhetorical activity. The Conference on College Composition and Communication supports this theoretical concept and encourages teaching methods in the classroom that allow for social activities such as collaborative peer review throughout the drafting, writing, and revision processes. I have experienced this concept at work in the KSU writing center, as well. At times, students come into a session with no idea what to write or even where to start. Immediately, we begin by reviewing the instructor’s guidelines for the assignment. Generally, although students have already read the instructions on their own, they seem to have an “ah-ha” moment where they begin to understand the task at hand. The only aspect of the writing process that has changed since they entered the writing center was a conversation, a social activity. As Grant references, “communication is so ingrained in human nature that often times we don’t need to think or analyze our actions in response to verbal cues” (“The Essence”). As a tutor-student partnership, we then begin the brainstorming process, and within minutes, students seem to have a glow about them, and stress levels seem to wither away. The process of talking about the assignment and bringing every-day context to the task at hand enables the writing process to begin.
Writing is a Process . . . Writing is just that — a process! Every process I have experienced and learned through my work in the writing center has led to understanding and believing that writing really is an actual process. In the beginning, it is crucial for students (and professors) to just get their thoughts expressed on paper or the flashing white, blank page on the computer screen. The initial process of letting the mind wander and documenting thoughts as they manifest is fundamental. For many students, this initial brainstorming will then lead to a workable outline from which students can reference as they begin the initial draft composition. This first draft is meant to establish a framework that students may then revise, participate in peer review, revise again, and so goes the recursive nature of writing. Helping students embrace this process of writing will lead to enhanced future success in all types of writing. Below is a video that explains this process in detail.
How to Teach Writing as a Process Using these two threshold concepts of learning as well as my own writing center experiences, I fully plan to integrate and contextualize them into my classroom pedagogy. Students will experience and have the opportunity to participate in peer review, which supports all three of the theoretical platforms and fosters the recursive process of writing. Above all else, writing tends to cohabitate with a persona of difficulty for many students. My student-centered philosophy is aimed at de-stigmatizing the writing process, strengthening student confidence in their own writing processes, and supporting the learning process of a skill that students will utilize for the rest of their academic and professional careers, in addition to their personal lives.
References
Abdullah, Shahid. Pixabay, 2019, pixabay.com/illustrations/plan-do-act-check-system-workflow-1725510/.
Adler-Kassner, Linda, and Elizabeth Wardle, editors. Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition. Utah State University Press, 2016.
BibliU. “What Does ‘Holistic Learning’ Mean for Students?” YouTube, uploaded 1 Aug. 2019. youtube.com/watch?v=2aFIfCwSEnc&feature=youtu.be. Accessed 30 Nov. 2019.
Cafaro, Lorenzo. Pixabay, 2019, pixabay.com/photos/correcting-proof-paper-correction-1870721/.
“CCCC Position Statements.” Conference on College Composition, 22 October 2018, cccc.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions.
Geralt. Pixabay, 2019, pixabay.com/photos/feedback-exchange-of-ideas-debate-2463927/.
Grant, Melinda. “The Essence of Writing.” Whisperings, 9 Sept. 2019, mgailgrant.com/philosophical-thoughts/the-essence-of-writing/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2019.
Grant, Melinda. “Perseverance in Writing.” Whisperings, 25 Aug. 2019, mgailgrant.com/philosophical-thoughts/perseverance-in-writing/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2019.
Grant, Melinda. “Threshold Concepts in Action.” Whisperings, 2019, mgailgrant.com/projects-assignments/threshold-concepts-in-action/.
Grant, Melinda. “Writing: Know Yourself.” Whisperings, 14 Sept. 2019, mgailgrant.com/philosophical-thoughts/know-yourself-through-writing/. Accessed 30 Nov. 2019.
Kalhh. Pixabay, 2019, pixabay.com/illustrations/workshop-training-seminar-group-1425446/.
NikolayFrolochkin. Pixabay, 2019, pixabay.com/photos/diary-office-work-pen-notebook-1974728/.
Write On! with Jamie. “How to Teach Writing: The Writing Process.” YouTube, uploaded 2 May 2013. youtu.be/JPUh9mfSqWU. Accessed 30 Nov. 2019.
-
Principles of Teaching Writing
Teaching Writing in Postsecondary Classrooms Writing is such a complex yet fundamental aspect of our lives. It begins in early childhood and evolves and matures throughout our adulthood. Each week we have discussed the threshold concepts presented in Naming What We Know, classroom edition (Adler-Kassner and Wardle), and examined writing from many different angles: writing as a social and rhetorical activity, writing and how it speaks to situations through recognizable forms, how writing enacts and creates identities and ideologies, how all writers have more to learn, how writing is (also always) a cognitive activity. Each threshold concept deciphered the mechanics of not only how writing is viewed, but how writing is learned and executed. As I prepare to enter the classroom as a first-year English composition instructor, I hold tightly to the beliefs that the progression of learning never ceases. In other words, we are never truly done with learning everything there is to know about writing. Do you know why? Let’s consider this paradigm.
One of the first steps in preparing for the classroom is to gain a better understanding of the needs and expectations of students in regards to writing. By studying position statements from the WPA (Council of Writing Program Administrators), the CCCC (Conference of College Composition and Communication), and NCTE (National Council of Teachers of English), I have been able to identify common goals, techniques, and assessment guidelines for teachers of composition. What I discovered, is that many of the threshold concepts that I have studied as part of my graduate school curriculum in preparation for teaching in the classroom are also common themes found in position statements of the professional programs mentioned above.
The CCCC lists twelve identified principles of sound writing instruction in their purpose statements. As I was glancing over the guidelines, the first three caught my attention. It shouldn’t have been a surprise, yet I found myself intrigued to see three principles of “good writing” instructions to be three specific topics I have studied quite extensively this semester. The first principle listed by the CCCC is, “Sound writing instruction emphasizes the rhetorical nature of writing” (“CCCC Position Statements”). This is also the first threshold concept I studied, “Writing as a social and rhetorical activity” (Adler-Kassner and Wardle). The CCCC’s position statement for this concept is, “To be rhetorically sensitive, good writers must be flexible. They should be able to pursue their purposes by consciously adapting their writing both to the contexts in which it will be read and to the expectations, knowledge, experiences, values, and beliefs of their readers.” To understand this principle, let us first watch this video produced by the University of Maryland, Baltimore Writing Lab titled, “The Rhetorical Situation”:
“The Rhetorical Situation” As we can see, being able to utilize persuasive rhetoric leads to sound writing practices in the classroom.
Another threshold concept that is utilized in the CCCC’s principles of sound writing is audience. Learning to write for an intended audience is a skill that uses the rhetorical devices logos, pathos, and ethos. In the postsecondary teaching of writing, creating opportunities for students to engage and practice this type of persuasive rhetoric will help develop first-year composition (FYC) writing abilities.
Writing is considered a social activity, and as we have discussed, this is one of the main threshold concepts studied this semester. The CCCC recognizes the importance of this theory, and teachers are encouraged to incorporate teaching methods in the classroom that allow for social activities such as collaborative peer review throughout the drafting, writing, and revision processes. In addition to peer review, many universities have writing centers where students can receive first-hand experience of having their writing read by a specific audience. As a teaching assistant in KSU’s writing center, I have participated in this process and can’t speak highly enough about the benefits of having someone else, even another student, read your writing. Usually, within minutes of having a student read their work aloud, they begin making unsolicited changes in their composition piece. Why? Well, because writing is a social activity. When students have the opportunity to hear their words, they relate the written word to the spoken word, and suddenly, writing becomes easier.
I am excited to witness the threshold concepts presented this semester actively in the first-year composition classroom. The theoretical framework of the Conference on College Composition and Communication’s position statements is something I have been studying all semester via multi-modal methods of classroom discussion, PowerPoint presentations, blog posts, and group workshops. I mention these various methods of learning because it is a process I intend to model in the classroom. Good writing begins with great instruction.
Works Cited
Adler-Kassner, Linda, and Elizabeth Wardle, editors. Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition. Utah State University Press, 2016.
“Appealing to Your Audience.” The Word on College Reading and Writing, (n.d.), openoregon.pressbooks.pub/wrd/chapter/appealing-to-your-audience/.
“CCCC Position Statements.” Conference on College Composition, 22 October 2018, cccc.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions.
“How We Help Writers.” Kennesaw State University Writing Center, 2019, writingcenter.kennesaw.edu/writing_support/help-writers.php.
Sablan, Jurika. “Benefits of Peer Review in Academic Writing.” Youtube, uploaded 23 June 2017, youtu.be/iNsFkQAqQGs.
“The Rhetorical Situation.” YouTube, uploaded by University of Maryland, Baltimore Writing Center, 24 April 2014, youtu.be/A-eRycqjzbg.
Tumisu. Pixabay. 2019, pixabay.com/illustrations/back-to-school-classroom-school-913073/.
-
Writing: A Cognitive Activity
Metacognition: Thinking about thinking! Over the course of this semester, I have been quite amazed at how my “brain has stretched” for lack of a better way to describe the phenomenon. The threshold concepts we have been studying in regards to writing have changed my outlook on various aspects of composition; this week is no exception. I have always been interested in how the human brain processes information, hence why I chose the field of psychology for my undergraduate degree. The title of this week’s threshold concept is, “Writing is a Cognitive Activity.” According to Dylan Dryer, one of the premises of writing is, “… if writing is always a social and rhetorical act, it necessarily involves cognition” (71). Further research suggests that not only is writing a social and rhetorical act but, “neural processes essential to writing must be successfully coordinated across different areas of the brain; revision, even for seemingly uncomplicated ‘errors’ is cognitively quite complex” (73).
The human brain has a workspace known as working memory. This is where bits of information are processed and stored for easy access in cognitive events. As Dryer mentions, “… writing is cognitive not only because it draws on the full resources of our nervous system but because it actively influences our nervous system as well” (73). Have you ever stopped to wonder how the human brain facilitates the thought process a writer undergoes when composing? Below is a short video by Trace Dominguez that describes how your brain actually powers your thoughts.
Thinking requires brain activity… Have you ever noticed that writing a paper, article, or even blog post is easier and more enjoyable when you have an emotional connection to the topic being discussed? Charles Bazerman and Howard Tinberg explain this paradigm, “The emotional engagement of scientific writers for their subject may entail careful attention to evidence and reasoning grounded in prior work in the field and understanding of the theory and methodological principles of the field; yet without a passion for the subject that turns a writer’s full mind and thought to the task of producing new words and ideas, little of value would get written” (74-75). As writers, we love to write about topics in which we have an emotional connection or issues that we find relatable. I know for myself, one of the most challenging forms of writing I have experienced was the standard five-paragraph theme essay in high school. Writing exactly five paragraphs on something of little interest to myself, was not enjoyable. However, the repetitive style that was required led to a familiar situation explained by Chris Anson, “repeated practice of the same mental task or activity can lead to what psychologists call automaticity or unconscious competence, the application of a process or the retrieval of information that doesn’t require conscious attention” (77).
Leigh Hancock, an English instructor for Columbia Gorge Community College, explains to her students how writing involves the full brain. With each hemisphere of the brain specializing in different aspects, they must work together for elements involved in writing to manifest.
Not only is writing a cognitive process, but it also involves metacognition. Metacognition is the process of “thinking” about mental processes! As Tinberg suggests, “Metacognition is not cognition. Performance, however thoughtful, is not the same as awareness of how that performance came to be” (75). One form of metacognition employed by writers is the technique known as reflection. The goal of reflection for a writer is to consider why they made rhetorical choices they chose. As Kara Taczak stated, “… writers who are more attuned to conscious reflection make deeper choices” (79). This process gives writers an opportunity to learn from their methods, identify meaning behind their chosen style of rhetoric, and adapt future writing based on the knowledge they glean from studying their own preferences. Put simply, metacognition is a valuable methodology each writer has the ability to utilize to become a better writer. Taking time to understand their stylistic decisions will help them identify areas for change or development.
Works Cited
Adler-Kassner, Linda, and Elizabeth Wardle, editors. Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition. Utah State University Press, 2016.
Altmann, Gerd. Pixabay. 2019, pixabay.com/illustrations/board-think-structure-solution-765310/.
Anson, Chris M. “Habituated Practice Can Lead to Entrenchment.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 77-78.
Bazerman, Charles, and Howard Tinberg. “Writing is an Expression of Embodied Cognition.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 74-75.
Dominguez, Trace. “This is How Your Brain Powers Your Thoughts.” YouTube, uploaded by Seeker, 9 April 2017, youtu.be/yxUkUaV2VPs.
Dryer, Dylan B. “Writing is (Also Always) A Cognitive Activity.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 71-74.
Hancock, Leigh. “Whole Brain Writing.” YouTube, uploaded by Columbia Gorge Community College, 14 August 2014, youtu.be/uebN8sUvgsc.
“Reflective Writing.” Youtube, uploaded by SkillsTeamHullUni, 3 March 2014, youtu.be/QoI67VeE3ds.
Samuels, S. Jay, and Richard F. Flor. “The Importance of Automaticity for Developing Expertise in Reading.” Reading & Writing Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 2, 1997, pp. 107-121, doi:10.1080/1057356970130202.
Taczak, Kara. “Reflection is Critical for Writers’ Development.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 78-79.
Tinberg, Howard. “Metacognition is Not Cognition.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 75-76.
“What’s Metacognition — and Why Does it Matter?” YouTube, uploaded by Edutopia, 12 October 2018, youtu.be/QJWsIJQHUxM.
-
Failure Leads to Success
Writing failures lead to future successful writing. Most of us don’t like the thought of any type of failure. The word itself has such a negative connotation for many of us regardless of our cultural background. When we set out to complete a project, strive towards a goal, or develop a specific skill set, we often put everything we can muster into the situation. Therefore, when the results come in less than stellar, and we perceive the effort has lead to some type of failure, we find ourselves depressed, saddened, and disappointed. Often times, this process feels like the end of the road, and the individual experiencing the failure must then decide to either try again or walk away.
As a writer, I, too, have experienced this recursive writing process of identifying mistakes made, improving the process, and determining whether I want to pursue the intended goal or dismiss it from the foreseeable future. From an academic perspective, this situation is echoed through returned graded essays. Maybe a student has written what they felt should be an A paper, yet cringed to find a C in bold red at the top of the page. For an author, maybe they thought they had just completed the next bestseller, only to find their book sales meandering next to zero sales. Everyone’s experiences will vary, but one thing remains the same; it happens to everyone.
Collin Brooke and Allison Carr describe this phenomenon best by elaborating, “…in reality, every idea from every discipline is a human idea that comes from a natural thoughtful and (ideally) unending journey in which thinkers deeply understand the current state of knowledge, take a tiny step in a new direction, almost immediately hit a dead end, learn from that misstep, and through iteration, inevitably move forward” (63). Everyone experiences failure in some capacity throughout life. The difference is whether they allow the experience to define them. Finding a way to utilize the lessons of failure in a classroom setting by altering pedagogical structure would be most beneficial to students. “Embracing failure in the writing classroom in these ways makes failure speakable and doable” (Brooke and Carr 63). By changing how we view failure in academic settings, maybe students will begin to see it as just a stepping stone leading to better writing technique in lieu of the end result.
GCFLearnFree.Org is a non-profit organization dedicated to teaching skills that are needed for our modern-day society (2019). In the video provided below, they discuss the recursive cycle of writing and bring up valid points related to learning from failure.
What can we learn from failure? The topic of revision in writing, while often not met with excitement by writers, is a central piece of developing one’s writing, according to Doug Downs (66). As he explains, “First, unrevised writing (especially more extended pieces of writing) will rarely be as well suited to its purpose as it could be with revision. Second, writers who don’t revise are likely to see fewer positive results from their writing than those who build time for feedback and revision into their writing workflows” (66). Downs further explains that revising shouldn’t be an indicator of poor writing. Actually, it should be an indicator of more skilled writing as the author has taken the time to polish and improve the prose.
Contrary to popular belief, I believe it is essential for each of us to remember that as Shirley Rose described, “The ability to write is not an innate trait humans are born processing” (59). Further explained by Moats and Tulman, “human brains are naturally wired to speak; they are not naturally wired to read and write.” Writing, like most things in life, takes practice. The more a writer practices the skill, the more natural the process will become. And, more importantly, failure is the key to success. Each failure a writer experiences will add to the learning. The more we learn, the better we become. So, the next time you feel as though you have failed at something, remember, it only sets you up for future success. Embrace the challenge to try again, and you never know where the trail will lead.
Works Cited
Altmann, Gerd. Pixabay. 2019, pixabay.com/illustrations/words-letters-disillusionment-416435/
Brooke, Collin and Allison Carr. “Failure Can Be an Important Part of Writing Development.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 62-64.
Downs, Doug. “Revision is Central to Developing Writing.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 66-67.
GCFLearnFree.org. Goodwill Community Foundation, Incorporated, 2019, edu.gcfglobal.org/en/. Accessed 22 Sept. 2019.
“Learning From Failure.” YouTube, uploaded by GCFLearnFree.org, 10 July 2019 May 2019, youtu.be/MQx39z99_Js.
Moats, Louisa and Carol Tolman. “Speaking is Natural; Reading and Writing Are Not.” Reading Rockets, www.readingrockets.org/article/speaking-natural-reading-and-writing-are-not. Accessed 22 Sept. 2019.
Rose, Shirley. “All Writers Have More to Learn.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 59-61.
“The Recursive Writing Process.” YouTube, uploaded by Mometrix Academy, 16 May 2019, youtu.be/WVrvfSFrCwc.
-
Writing: Know Yourself
Who am I? What do I think? How do I feel? What are my biases? Writing, like life, is a series of events and experiences that lead the writer to traverse different paths. Often times, this exploratory process remains in the shadows, out of sight, and unbeknownst to each writer. As participants in our communities and disciplines, many times, we don’t recognize how our perspectives change over time as a result of our life experiences. In other words, we write what we know. However, sometimes, when we write, we don’t realize what we know. An excellent way to learn more about oneself, quite frankly, is to journal. By writing daily about your thoughts, feelings, experiences, and fears, you will begin to notice trends and realize how much you didn’t know about yourself. For more information on how to get started journaling, The Writing Cooperative has a great article that will help you begin an adventure to self awareness.
There are inherent biases in our voices, and those biases contribute to each writer’s message. Tony Scott so adeptly put this concept into perspective, “Writers are not separate from their writing, and they don’t just quickly and seamlessly adapt to new situations. Rather, writers are socialized, changed, through their writing in new environments, and these changes can have deep implications” (49). This concept reminds me of how varied each person’s childhood may be. From the conditions of each individual household, to what types of opportunities and events in which the child is exposed, to the dynamics of the community in which they were raised, no two people will share the exact same experience growing up. This, in itself, creates diversity amongst the masses. We all bring to the table different observations and understandings. Therefore, our writing not only shapes our identities and ideologies, but our identities and ideologies shape our writing.
By the process of being immersed into specific learning disciplines, otherwise known as discourse communities, or being exposed to conventions associated with these disciplines, writers naturally begin to think and associate their own beliefs within a similar theoretical framework as the discipline. For example, an undergraduate Psychology student is learning industry-specific vocabulary, methods of research, and styles of writing related to their specific field of study. After reading journal article after journal article and beginning to understand the process of research, unknowingly, the student will begin to write in a similar style to what they have been reading. The caveat is the student may be completely unaware of their change in writing style. This phenomenon is being studied to further our understanding of how discourse communities contribute to the student or individual developing institutional norms.
Ethnographic (scientific descriptions in regards to customs, norms, and differences among populations or groups of people) perspective is one type of consideration that research is pointing to as a means of identifying specific assumptions each discipline expects students to know before being exposed to the program. Freed and Broadhead’s article, College Composition and Communication, discusses and defines this concept further (163). The information gleaned from ethnographic research would be very helpful for trying to establish a platform for teaching creative writing within a specific community. Below is a short video which explains the value and processes of ethnographic research.
As with all technological advances, the composition of writing has changed over time. As Kathleen Blake Yancey points out, “Writers’ identities are, in part, a function of the time when they live: their histories, identities, and processes are situated in a given historical context” (52). The construct of teaching writing has also changed over time. As Yancey indicates, “Teachers have shifted from teaching writing through analysis of others’ texts to teaching writing through engaging students in composing itself.” Writing used to only encompass the written word, but through advances in the field of technology, writers can utilize images, videos, and sounds to convey a multimodal experience to the reader (53). The diversity of individual life experiences culminating into each writer’s individualistic style creates a paradoxical effect for teachers trying to educate others within the discipline. No two students share the same life experiences, which then begs the question, “Should the instruction of writing be uniform or tailored to the individual?”
Furthermore, as suggested by Andrea Lunsford, “Even when writing is private or meant for the writer alone, it is shaped by the writer’s earlier interactions with writing and with other people and with all the writer has read and learned” (54). A recent University of Florida study determined that what college students read directly affected their syntactic sophistication; those that primarily read journal articles and literary fiction, or general nonfiction displayed higher levels of sophistication (Douglas and Miller, 77). This adds to the level of complexity in how to teach a streamlined process (of writing) across a diversity of students. When it comes to writing, students will always draw upon previous knowledge of how to draft the text, organize the argument, or details of the subject in general (Lunsford, 55).
Works Cited
Douglas, Yellowlees, and Samantha Miller. “Syntactic Complexity of Reading Content Directly Impacts Complexity of Mature Students’ Writing.” www.sciedupress.com/journal/index.php/ijba/article/view/9481/5736
Freed, Richard C., and Glenn J Broadhead. “Discourse Communities, Sacred Texts, and Institutional Norms.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 38, no. 2, 1987, pp. 163. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/357716.
Lunsford, Andrea A. “Writing is Informed by Prior Experience.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 54-55.
Scott, Tony. “Writing Enacts and Creates Identities and Ideologies.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 49.
The Sweet Spot. “What is Ethnography and How Does it Work?” YouTube, uploaded 6 Dec. 2017, youtu.be/_c1SUHTG6B8.
Turner, Eric. “The Best Way to Learn From Yourself.” The Writing Cooperative, 22 July 2018, writingcooperative.com/the-best-way-to-learn-from-yourself-cc9713badd26. Accessed 13 Sept. 2019.
Vesalainen, Tero. Pixabay. 2019, pixabay.com/photos/thought-idea-innovation-imagination-2123970/
Yancey, Kathleen Blake. “Writers’ Histories, Processes, and Identities Vary.” Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, Classroom Edition, edited by Adler-Kassner, Linda and Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, 2016, pp. 52-53.