What are we about?
I’m surprised at the similarities between college writing assignments (as described in Roen Ch. 4) and my experiences teaching middle-high school student writers. The assignments are similar as are and the resources. For example, the idea that all writing is autobiography (Donald Murray’s phrase as used in Kyburz’s essay, Roen, p. 137). I’ve read Murray’s article on this, and agree that all writing is autobiography (if it is writing and not fill-in-the blank). Why does this surprise me? I guess because it seems too simple, too accessible for writers to enter into a writing assignment when the topic, focus, and ideas start within. I’m glad to know that this idea does not end when we step out of the high school writing classroom. The sad truth is that (I fear) few teachers value the role autobiography plays in writing. I think it is too easy to focus on the need to complete a list of assignments that have been prescribed by an outside curriculum, and that student input on topic or form is seldom considered, and if choices are given, they are highly controlled.
I have a question though - how much flexibility do college composition students find for choosing their own topic or form/genre? Is this traditionally prescribed so that all students write the same type of paper? I would imagine the students choose the topic, though the type of paper is prescribed? What might be the benefits and/or drawbacks of allowing student choice?
After reading the first article in Ch. 14 of Roen, I wonder about the use of research writing. If I take the writing assignments in both chapters 4 and 14, I wonder how much can be accomplished in a one-semester course? I see value in the variety of assignments presented, and I think student inquiry should drive as much as possible of what a student writes. However, the time commitment is huge for the type of inquiry projects as outlined in “First-Year Composition as an Introduction to Academic Discourse.” Our decisions as instructors seem to boil down to first knowing our course’s main objectives and drafting a syllabus that will best support this, and then structuring assignments to “make” it happen. Is the course’s objective to strengthen student writing and confidence for a variety of writing experiences, or is it to prepare students to enter into academic discourse (as defined by the Braun and Prineas chapter), or what? I’m trying to remember myself during my first year in college – what would I have researched that would have benefited me in my career? I’m afraid my then-medical course of study would have led me into a dismal topic that may not have assisted me in joining the Burkian Parlor. I’ll have to keep thinking about this—I do like research, especially student-generated topics that they care to study. I think it was the language (“professoriate”) and the slam (though likely justified) on non-academic texts (again, the Braun article) that have left me a sour taste.
I have a question though - how much flexibility do college composition students find for choosing their own topic or form/genre? Is this traditionally prescribed so that all students write the same type of paper? I would imagine the students choose the topic, though the type of paper is prescribed? What might be the benefits and/or drawbacks of allowing student choice?
After reading the first article in Ch. 14 of Roen, I wonder about the use of research writing. If I take the writing assignments in both chapters 4 and 14, I wonder how much can be accomplished in a one-semester course? I see value in the variety of assignments presented, and I think student inquiry should drive as much as possible of what a student writes. However, the time commitment is huge for the type of inquiry projects as outlined in “First-Year Composition as an Introduction to Academic Discourse.” Our decisions as instructors seem to boil down to first knowing our course’s main objectives and drafting a syllabus that will best support this, and then structuring assignments to “make” it happen. Is the course’s objective to strengthen student writing and confidence for a variety of writing experiences, or is it to prepare students to enter into academic discourse (as defined by the Braun and Prineas chapter), or what? I’m trying to remember myself during my first year in college – what would I have researched that would have benefited me in my career? I’m afraid my then-medical course of study would have led me into a dismal topic that may not have assisted me in joining the Burkian Parlor. I’ll have to keep thinking about this—I do like research, especially student-generated topics that they care to study. I think it was the language (“professoriate”) and the slam (though likely justified) on non-academic texts (again, the Braun article) that have left me a sour taste.
posted by Amy | 11:10 AM
1 Comments:
While I do see the importance of helping beginning writers enter the conversation by using autobiography or other suitable methods of rhetorically framing an issue in ways that are encouraging and meaningful for them, I think students will need to quickly learn to do both non-academic writing, as well as academic writing as they move through the writing process.
One of the ways I imagine I could teach an understanding of both types of writing is to make an assignment where students get a popular source and an academic source on the same issue and then ask students to do a rhetorical analysis of the articles with the outcome being a successful understanding of the rhetorical difference between the two sources.
Then, another way students could appreciate the difference is by covering pages 63-65 in Allyn & Bacon where the authors explain different types of essays. I think writing expressive or explorartory essays could be part of the writing process and as students gain confidence, then they progress to "Writing to Analyze, Synthesize, or Interpret" and/or "Writing to Persuade" on page 64. I think students should focus more on "analysis/synthesis purpose" than on "persuasive purpose," because I think it would be really tough for a fyc student to have sufficient academic knowledge to write a persuasive paper that doesn't overreach. Heck, as a graduate student I'm afraid of overreaching myself. I think Donna's writing assignment #4 is an example of an inquiry-driven essay or the "analysis/synthesis purpose" essay described in Allyn & Bacon. BTW, I think writing for a literary purpose described on page 65 of A&B is beyond the scope of fyc.
And speaking of literary, in order to accomplish a research-based writing project in a one semester course, I think we have to give up the thought of assigning novels or using course readers. There just isn't time in a one semester course to have students read literature or do extensive issues-type reading that does not relate or doesn't prepare them to write particular paper assignments.
In order to mediate the issue of plagiarism, I think I will need to assign at least a general topic and method and then help students find ways to incorporate their voice and style to the rhetorical situation. While some could see this as problematic, it is a pragmatic approach. Afterall, as students begin their careers as an entry-level employees or as an entry-level academics, their employeers or faculty/mentors will require or suggest suitable topics or direction of study in the career field or academic sub-field that the student has self-selected.
Post a Comment
<< Home