http://www.writingproject.org/cs/nwpp/print/nwpr/777
I found this review about Elbow's book Everyone Can Write. The reviewer says that everyone who is composition studies or who teaches should read this book. I agree. I got so much out of this book. I think Faith talked about theory and asked how it could be applied. This book is a wonderful practical application of a "hopeful" theory. Great book.
Monday, February 28, 2005
Class blog for 2/28
The main theme for me was this idea from Charney: "usually practicing a skill reduces the time necessary to execute the skill successfully" except with writing. This seems obvious when I read this. It is important to convey this to students because their thinking is generally the opposite: The more I write, the easier it will get or Writing comes naturally and easily for everyone except me.
This idea was reflected in several of the essays. Bizzell writes that students think that good writers write quickly and get A's, "instant text production." Donald Graves is quoted in Sudol’s article: “Children suggest that when adults write, the words flow, arrive ‘Shazam!’ on the page. Like the tables, word ar dictated to us form on high; we only hold the pen and a mysterious force dictates stories, poems, and letters. The better the writer, the less the struggle.”
All of these quotes made me think about the importance of sharing our own writing processes and failures with students. Sudol agrees, “I model my own invention process by writing along with my students and sharing my work.” So, while you present the invention exercises to the class, will you stand in front of the room watching everyone or will you sit and write with them and share your writing with the class?
This idea was reflected in several of the essays. Bizzell writes that students think that good writers write quickly and get A's, "instant text production." Donald Graves is quoted in Sudol’s article: “Children suggest that when adults write, the words flow, arrive ‘Shazam!’ on the page. Like the tables, word ar dictated to us form on high; we only hold the pen and a mysterious force dictates stories, poems, and letters. The better the writer, the less the struggle.”
All of these quotes made me think about the importance of sharing our own writing processes and failures with students. Sudol agrees, “I model my own invention process by writing along with my students and sharing my work.” So, while you present the invention exercises to the class, will you stand in front of the room watching everyone or will you sit and write with them and share your writing with the class?
Charney
Ch. 2 Roen, "Teaching Writing as a Process"
"Usually practicing a skill reduces the time necessary to eecute the skill successfully" is is the opposite with writing.
This could be a depressing statement, but it needs to be addressed with students to keep from further depressing moments. There is this thinking that writing should get easier, and that professional writers can just write and it is not difficult for them. The better you are, the more practice you get, the more time the writing will take. Although I knew this, I never saw it stated explicitly.
It's wrong to say it will get easier. Maybe generating ideas will get easier.
Winterowd "Rhetorical Invention"
Well, I feel like ENG 1000 separates invention from composition. I guess that's why I like the two-part composition--with a first year comp class followed by an exposition class.
Induction is more intuitive. If we want students to problematiz, they need to go into an issue this way. They are used to going into research deductively. We stifle our writing and the direction of our research by working deductively.
"heuristics vs prescriptives"
"heuristics are procedures that encourage the writer to walk 'around' his or her subjects, viewing them from different angles."
1973 Young and Roen
"The results of the experiments provide clear support for the proposition that strong personal involvement in an intellectual activity and substantial knowledge of the subject tend to improve the quality of what is written."
Bizzell's "Composing Processes"
Bizzell brings the same point up as Charney that students think that good writers write quickly and get As. "instant text production"
"Instead, students brought their finished products to the teacher for correction and evaluation."
Crowley, "Teaching Invention"
invention helps identify more arguments
"Ancient teachers insisted that students should construct all the arguments available in a given situation, even though they might use only one or two . . . good intellectual practice" (231).
Invention should force them to look at all aspects of an argument.
All of this reminds me of Tom Romano's idea of the multigenre paper in the book Blending Genres, Altering Styles. I think a good invention would be to take a freewriting about an idea for a paper and then look at the people. Write about the issue from the perspectives of different people, using either monologue or dialogue. I say these two genres because I think it would be easier to write, to envision that character as a person and the real issues that he or she might have. This is also a great revision exercise because it opens up possibilities that writers might not have considered.
My three inventions this week are the multigenre, Perl's composing guidelines, Moffett's sensory writing, and loop writing (is this the same as the open-ended writing process? I think it is.)
"Usually practicing a skill reduces the time necessary to eecute the skill successfully" is is the opposite with writing.
This could be a depressing statement, but it needs to be addressed with students to keep from further depressing moments. There is this thinking that writing should get easier, and that professional writers can just write and it is not difficult for them. The better you are, the more practice you get, the more time the writing will take. Although I knew this, I never saw it stated explicitly.
It's wrong to say it will get easier. Maybe generating ideas will get easier.
Winterowd "Rhetorical Invention"
Well, I feel like ENG 1000 separates invention from composition. I guess that's why I like the two-part composition--with a first year comp class followed by an exposition class.
Induction is more intuitive. If we want students to problematiz, they need to go into an issue this way. They are used to going into research deductively. We stifle our writing and the direction of our research by working deductively.
"heuristics vs prescriptives"
"heuristics are procedures that encourage the writer to walk 'around' his or her subjects, viewing them from different angles."
1973 Young and Roen
"The results of the experiments provide clear support for the proposition that strong personal involvement in an intellectual activity and substantial knowledge of the subject tend to improve the quality of what is written."
Bizzell's "Composing Processes"
Bizzell brings the same point up as Charney that students think that good writers write quickly and get As. "instant text production"
"Instead, students brought their finished products to the teacher for correction and evaluation."
Crowley, "Teaching Invention"
invention helps identify more arguments
"Ancient teachers insisted that students should construct all the arguments available in a given situation, even though they might use only one or two . . . good intellectual practice" (231).
Invention should force them to look at all aspects of an argument.
All of this reminds me of Tom Romano's idea of the multigenre paper in the book Blending Genres, Altering Styles. I think a good invention would be to take a freewriting about an idea for a paper and then look at the people. Write about the issue from the perspectives of different people, using either monologue or dialogue. I say these two genres because I think it would be easier to write, to envision that character as a person and the real issues that he or she might have. This is also a great revision exercise because it opens up possibilities that writers might not have considered.
My three inventions this week are the multigenre, Perl's composing guidelines, Moffett's sensory writing, and loop writing (is this the same as the open-ended writing process? I think it is.)
Monday, February 21, 2005
Hess Article
Comp Teaching
I didn't like the sound of Hess's Surrealist theme when I began reading, but then I liked some of his assignments. I also realized Hess and I share some opinions on teaching. Hess seems different than some composition teachers. As teachers, we are quick to judge and dismiss what the students bring to our classes. "Didn't anyone teach them before they came to my class?" I think this feeling is prevalent for most teachers. He says that it is important to value what they bring to the classroom.
Also, he cares about how the students learn. His mention and concern of students' metacognitive awareness surprised me. It is easy for the assignment to become the focus instead of helping students to meet the requirement of the assignment rather than blindly expecting them to accomplish the task. He isn't just asking them to fulfill a writing assignment, but he asks them to think about their own process--do some metacognition--and to allow them to work together in a collborative environment. He really decentered the authority in that classroom by allowing the students to become the experts--the sources. By creating this student-centered classroom--this inquiry classroom--he models Friere.
I thought it was interesting that he modeled this student-centered classroom and really forced them to re-think their perspectives on research and then he included some assignments that didn't seem to match his previous goals. And the students noticed. It can be very easy when you get tired or you are not sure what to do in class to just throw some assignment in that isn't genuine--that doesn't have a real purpose. He had challenged their thinking so much and then he gave them the equivalent of some busy work and some of the students noticed.
I like the idea of a theme. I'm wondering what my theme should be. I don't know yet. Does anyone know if they will use a theme? If they do, what will it be?
I didn't like the sound of Hess's Surrealist theme when I began reading, but then I liked some of his assignments. I also realized Hess and I share some opinions on teaching. Hess seems different than some composition teachers. As teachers, we are quick to judge and dismiss what the students bring to our classes. "Didn't anyone teach them before they came to my class?" I think this feeling is prevalent for most teachers. He says that it is important to value what they bring to the classroom.
Also, he cares about how the students learn. His mention and concern of students' metacognitive awareness surprised me. It is easy for the assignment to become the focus instead of helping students to meet the requirement of the assignment rather than blindly expecting them to accomplish the task. He isn't just asking them to fulfill a writing assignment, but he asks them to think about their own process--do some metacognition--and to allow them to work together in a collborative environment. He really decentered the authority in that classroom by allowing the students to become the experts--the sources. By creating this student-centered classroom--this inquiry classroom--he models Friere.
I thought it was interesting that he modeled this student-centered classroom and really forced them to re-think their perspectives on research and then he included some assignments that didn't seem to match his previous goals. And the students noticed. It can be very easy when you get tired or you are not sure what to do in class to just throw some assignment in that isn't genuine--that doesn't have a real purpose. He had challenged their thinking so much and then he gave them the equivalent of some busy work and some of the students noticed.
I like the idea of a theme. I'm wondering what my theme should be. I don't know yet. Does anyone know if they will use a theme? If they do, what will it be?
Mickey Hess article
I questioned Hess's Surrealist theme as I began reading the article. Then I realized that Hess and I aren't too far apart really. Hess is different than some composition teachers. He cares about how the students learn. His mention of students' metacognitive awareness surprised me. As teachers, we are quick to judge and dismiss what the students bring to our classes. "Didn't anyone teach them before they came to my class?" I think this feeling is prevalent for most teachers. I also think that the assignment becomes the focus. But Hess's article goes beyond that. He says that it is important to value what they bring to the classroom. He isn't just asking them to fulfill a writing assignment, but he asks them to think about their own process--do some metacognition--and to allow them to work together in a collborative environment. He really decentered the authority in that classroom by allowing the students to become the experts--the sources. By creating this student-centered classroom--this inquiry classroom--he is modeling Friere.
I thought it was interesting that he modeled this student-centered classroom and really forced them to re-think their perspectives on research and then he included some assignments that didn't seem to match his previous goals. And the students noticed. It can be very easy when you get tired or you are not sure what to do in class to just through some assignment in that isn't genuine--that doesn't have a real purpose. He had challenged their thinking so much and then he gave them the equivalent of some busy work and some of the students noticed.
I like the idea of a theme. I'm wondering what my theme should be. I don't know yet.
He quotes Ervin who writes that she has to "disabuse them [students] of the notion that the principal purpose of writing is self-expression." What writing, except for technical writing, isn't some sort of personal expression. If we see "research" writing as a genre without personal expression then we confirm to students that their literal definition of research is correct: "reporting, restating, or repeating information."
Then he quotes, Barth. We discussed this before. Isn't our goal to invite students to become participants in academic work rather than just regurgitators or experts. Friere would support that we invite students to add and participants rather than sit by passively and repeating what "experts" have said on a topic.
Actually, some things that he mentioned doing in class reminded me why I like the idea of an I-Search paper. I like that the student picks a topic in which she has a genuine need to know more about. The paper includes field work--especially interviews. When the topic is important to them, then they begin looking more critically and analytically at the sources. The metawriting he includes is also hugely important. This allows them to see that all sources don't have a simple right or wrong answer. When they start looking critically at research then they begin to see the arguments and disagreements and where their opinions stand in the academic conversations about the topic.
When he quoted Berthoff, it made me think about Moffett and his sensory writing. I would like to turn his sensory writing assignment into a research type assignment. I don't think it would be hard to do. Then I could incorporate some field work into that assignment.
I thought it was interesting that he modeled this student-centered classroom and really forced them to re-think their perspectives on research and then he included some assignments that didn't seem to match his previous goals. And the students noticed. It can be very easy when you get tired or you are not sure what to do in class to just through some assignment in that isn't genuine--that doesn't have a real purpose. He had challenged their thinking so much and then he gave them the equivalent of some busy work and some of the students noticed.
I like the idea of a theme. I'm wondering what my theme should be. I don't know yet.
He quotes Ervin who writes that she has to "disabuse them [students] of the notion that the principal purpose of writing is self-expression." What writing, except for technical writing, isn't some sort of personal expression. If we see "research" writing as a genre without personal expression then we confirm to students that their literal definition of research is correct: "reporting, restating, or repeating information."
Then he quotes, Barth. We discussed this before. Isn't our goal to invite students to become participants in academic work rather than just regurgitators or experts. Friere would support that we invite students to add and participants rather than sit by passively and repeating what "experts" have said on a topic.
Actually, some things that he mentioned doing in class reminded me why I like the idea of an I-Search paper. I like that the student picks a topic in which she has a genuine need to know more about. The paper includes field work--especially interviews. When the topic is important to them, then they begin looking more critically and analytically at the sources. The metawriting he includes is also hugely important. This allows them to see that all sources don't have a simple right or wrong answer. When they start looking critically at research then they begin to see the arguments and disagreements and where their opinions stand in the academic conversations about the topic.
When he quoted Berthoff, it made me think about Moffett and his sensory writing. I would like to turn his sensory writing assignment into a research type assignment. I don't think it would be hard to do. Then I could incorporate some field work into that assignment.
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Response to Gilles posts
Amy and I have been discussing James Moffett and the ladder of abstraction. A lot of our talk about "service" is very high on the ladder of abstraction. What if we brought it down to the lowest rung of the ladder and have some concrete talk. But first, I would like to challenge all of you to play the believing and doubting game with the word "service" in relation to a first-year composition course. Part of teaching composition, I believe, is being open to and responding to ideas that may not be your own. So, we've covered many possible negative connotations concerning what "service" means, but imagine that you believe service could have a positive connotation. What could Gilles have meant?
When I do the believing/doubting, I see composition as a service course in the best sense of the word. If a service position, for example, a Wal-mart greeter, means that he or she is there to help, then that is what I am as a composition teacher. I'm there to help.
When I do the believing/doubting, I see composition as a service course in the best sense of the word. If a service position, for example, a Wal-mart greeter, means that he or she is there to help, then that is what I am as a composition teacher. I'm there to help.
What's wrong with Gilles's article?
Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I loved Gilles because he suggested Writing Project philosophy for improving writing instruction.
"The key is regular, informal practicer at writing." (5)
"Our service courses should provide students with the oppotunity to practice the craft of writing." (5)
And his three purposes for a liberal arts education. All good. Yes, he says that other disciplines blame composition for not teaching students how to write. Someone will always be blaming you for something. Probably rarely to your face. Just do what you know to be write. Be conscientious. Work hard. Be fair. And you will see improvement in student writing. If you make them comfortable with writing, they will succeed in other disciplines. I truly believe that.
"The key is regular, informal practicer at writing." (5)
"Our service courses should provide students with the oppotunity to practice the craft of writing." (5)
And his three purposes for a liberal arts education. All good. Yes, he says that other disciplines blame composition for not teaching students how to write. Someone will always be blaming you for something. Probably rarely to your face. Just do what you know to be write. Be conscientious. Work hard. Be fair. And you will see improvement in student writing. If you make them comfortable with writing, they will succeed in other disciplines. I truly believe that.
Writing in the Making of Knowledge
Well, I haven't posted because Amy and I have been in Santa Barbara. I left Springfield at 6:00 a.m. Thursday. It is Saturday night now, and I'm trying to evaluate what I've learned and noticed. We went to the National Writing Project local research initiative meeting. Our grant wasn't funded in the early summer, but we were invited as a development project. First of all, Santa Barbara is amazingly beautiful. It reminds me of Hawaii. The people are so nice. It's been busy, but I've enjoyed the venue. The sun and 70 degree weather. The beach. Our lanai faces the ocean about 100 feet away. Okay, but down to business. I always think about the people that I meet or see when I've only read their articles before. There were big names in composition. I read articles by these people in graduate school in 1997 through 1999. Digressing a bit, spending time with these "new" graduate students is interesting. It reminds me of when I started my program. The fun and camaraderie and community. It feels like it will last forever, but the two years go by quick and everyone goes their separate ways.
Restaurants to go to in Santa Barbara--La Super Rica--recommended by Julia Child and the L.A. Times Food critic and Brophy's--a seafood restaurant. I had lobster caught near the harbor. it was so good.
Back to comp. Names, names, names. Charles Bazerman. Sheridan Blau. National Writing Project: Richard Sterling, Paul LeMahieu. George Hillocks, Andrea Lunsford, Lee Ann Carroll. Deb Brandt.
The highlight for me was Andrea Lunsford, Lee Ann Carroll, and Deb Brandt. Oh, and seeing George Hillocks in person. Janet Swenson. 250 researchers in writing at the University of California-Santa Barbara. Susan McLeod. I'll think of more later.
I'm interested in the so-called difference between English Education and English. Composition-Rhetoric. The same problems we discuss in the Theory of Composition class are issues we discuss, study, and research in English Education. So, what's the difference. Okay, Amy says that English Ed may be more balanced with teaching and pedagogy and with teacher change. Yes, I agree. But what interests me is how much this Theory of Composition class boils down to pedagogy. Lots and lots of pedagogy talk. Very fascinating. I've always heard that English departments look down on English Education at some schools. At many schools English Education teachers are in the English department.
I just think it is so interesting English Ed is involved in the National Writing Project. I think of myself as a writing teacher--a teacher of composition. I want to always be that.
I didn't think about this, but the methods class that Russell wanted to observe is really a writing class. I would love for one of the TAs to observe Amy's class and the amount of writing that they do. Especially with a teacher involed in Writing Project all classes are writing classes--English teachers need to write and understand their own process before they try to teach students. Teachers of writers need to be writers. TAs, sharing your processes of writing--letting students being an apprentice to you is probably one of the most powerful methods of instruction that you can use.
Restaurants to go to in Santa Barbara--La Super Rica--recommended by Julia Child and the L.A. Times Food critic and Brophy's--a seafood restaurant. I had lobster caught near the harbor. it was so good.
Back to comp. Names, names, names. Charles Bazerman. Sheridan Blau. National Writing Project: Richard Sterling, Paul LeMahieu. George Hillocks, Andrea Lunsford, Lee Ann Carroll. Deb Brandt.
The highlight for me was Andrea Lunsford, Lee Ann Carroll, and Deb Brandt. Oh, and seeing George Hillocks in person. Janet Swenson. 250 researchers in writing at the University of California-Santa Barbara. Susan McLeod. I'll think of more later.
I'm interested in the so-called difference between English Education and English. Composition-Rhetoric. The same problems we discuss in the Theory of Composition class are issues we discuss, study, and research in English Education. So, what's the difference. Okay, Amy says that English Ed may be more balanced with teaching and pedagogy and with teacher change. Yes, I agree. But what interests me is how much this Theory of Composition class boils down to pedagogy. Lots and lots of pedagogy talk. Very fascinating. I've always heard that English departments look down on English Education at some schools. At many schools English Education teachers are in the English department.
I just think it is so interesting English Ed is involved in the National Writing Project. I think of myself as a writing teacher--a teacher of composition. I want to always be that.
I didn't think about this, but the methods class that Russell wanted to observe is really a writing class. I would love for one of the TAs to observe Amy's class and the amount of writing that they do. Especially with a teacher involed in Writing Project all classes are writing classes--English teachers need to write and understand their own process before they try to teach students. Teachers of writers need to be writers. TAs, sharing your processes of writing--letting students being an apprentice to you is probably one of the most powerful methods of instruction that you can use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)