tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-79249593820270210692024-02-08T08:13:32.096-08:00Ursuline College Writing Instruction ResourcesFred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-51476794194829517752013-06-12T08:30:00.001-07:002013-06-12T08:30:26.805-07:00Final PostI'm moving on to other duties at Ursuline, so my time as Campus Writing Liaison is coming to an end. There will be no more posts on this blog, but I'll leave it up for a while.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-59272070353745302052013-05-14T08:07:00.000-07:002013-05-14T08:16:02.341-07:00What Is “College-Level” Writing?: Volume 2: Assignments, Readings, and Student Writing Samples edited by Patrick Sullivan, Howard Tinberg, and Sheridan Blau<strong>Sullivan, Patrick, Howard Tinberg, and Sheridan Blau, eds. <i>What Is “College-Level” Writing?: Volume 2: Assignments, Readings, and Student Writing Samples</i>. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 2010. Print.</strong><br />
<br />
One might think that devoting two volumes to such a simple question as “What is ‘college-level’ writing?” is overkill, but just as answering “Who is buried in Grant’s tomb?” is trickier than it first appears to be (if you don’t know, the answer is at the end), so is answering the college-level writing question. Many of the essays in this anthology are valiant attempts at answering the question, but four essays stood out to me in particular.<br />
<br />
The first essay is “Academic Writing as Participation: Writing Your Way In” by Sheridan Blau. In this essay, Blau describes a workshop he puts on for instructors, which involves recreating the experience of entering a discourse community, modeled on what students experience when entering a college classroom. Blau believes the method he models, which forces students to identify genres by having them become participants in a discourse community wrestling with interpreting a poem is superior to the conventional way students get introduced to academic genres, which he describes in the following excerpt: "The model for academic papers for many professors . . . tends to be some version of the scholarly paper that professionals produce in the scholarly journals written for other specialists in the same field. That model can be a problem, however, for a number of reasons, the first of which is that students are required to write such papers before they have ever read one (and before they are sufficiently conversant with the issues in a field to read one), rendering their act of writing an artificial kind of composing, guided by formula and outlines and formal requirements designed to ensure that student papers will at least appear to observe the formal conventions of published work in a particular discourse community. A more serious problem created by the professional model is the fact that articles written in professional journals are by definition and cultural practice the discourse of experts who know a field intimately, can speak with authority about the background and history of the problem or question they are addressing, and usually know many of the readers who will be reading their work—know them personally from conferences, from hearing their presentations, or from reading their articles. In other words, academic authors are typically deeply embedded in an academic culture as participating members of an academic community, and their writing emerges from and reflects their status as members and contributors to the making of knowledge in their community" (29-30). Students, as Blau notes, are, of course, not really members of that community. Blau claims that the professional model, ironically, alienates students from becoming members of the academic community by inviting a pointless, almost parodic, form of academic discourse, which is particularly disheartening to minority and first-generation college students.<br />
<br />
The second essay is “Assignments from Hell: The View from the Writing Center” by Muriel Harris. In this essay, Harris reviews common ways assignments fall apart and suggests means by which such pitfalls can be avoided, writing, “Clarity, brevity, and specificity are goals to keep in mind when composing that most difficult of writing tasks—writing a good assignment.” She provides some handy guidelines for writing good assignments in an appendix.<br />
<br />
The third essay is “‘Botched Performances’: Rising to the Challenge of Teaching Our Underprepared Students” by Cheryl Hogue Smith. In this essay, Smith argues that basic or developmental writers are writing at the college-level, but higher education institutions often do not perceive correctly the abilities of such students because the institutions often focus on minor issues such as grammatical errors and allow those issues to overshadow larger issues such as genuine academic inquiry and critical thinking by students. She cites scholar Mike Rose to explain why students often make more minor errors when they are taking on new writing challenges and stretching their cognitive abilities and cites Mina Shaughnessy to note how colleges can better help students by grading more accurately, writing, “For example, nine incorrect uses of ‘there’ for ‘their’ wouldn’t actually count as nine errors but one—because the student is repeating the same error” (213). Valid arguments can be made for removing remedial classes from the college-level, but claiming that the students can’t think at the college-level isn’t one of them, as Smith demonstrates well here.<br />
<br />
The fourth essay is “What Can We Learn about ‘College-Level’ Writing from Basic Writing Students? The Importance of Reading” by Patrick Sullivan. In this essay, Sullivan notes the importance of self-discipline for academic success and how crucial reading skills are for writing skills, writing, “I would argue that unpreparedness in terms of reading (and what this suggests about student ability to think carefully, critically, and maturely) is at the heart of most writing problems we encounter in our composition classrooms” (247). Personally, I can attest to what Sullivan describes. My weak writers tend to be weak readers, and my strong writers tend to be strong readers. Reading and writing can be viewed as two aspects of the same set of skills.<br />
<br />
Many of the other essays are fine as well, making this volume a valuable read. It is available through OhioLINK.
As for “Who is buried in Grant’s tomb?”, the correct answer is no one since Ulysses S. Grant and his wife are entombed and not buried in the ground. Most people will accept “Grant” as an answer though, just as most people will accept writing done in college as college-level writing.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-53638871254900682502013-04-17T13:21:00.001-07:002013-05-14T08:15:39.866-07:00Everyday Genres: Writing Assignments across the Disciplines by Mary Soliday<strong>Soliday, Mary. <em>Everyday Genres: Writing Assignments across the Disciplines</em>. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois U P, 2011. Print. CCCC Studies in Writing Rhetoric.</strong><br />
<br />
Today, I wrote a letter of affirmation. Before today, I had never even heard of a letter of affirmation. I did some basic research on the genre of the letter of affirmation and gave it my best attempt, but I still don’t know enough about the genre to tell if I wrote a good letter or not. Though it’s been some time since I had the experience of learning a new textual genre, it is a common experience for our students. As they go from course to course, they are often encountering new genres. In this book, Mary Soliday discusses her experience at the City University of New York (CUNY) directing a writing across the curriculum (WAC) program, where she found that helping students understand a genre helped them succeed in writing it, an approach which seems like common sense but is too rarely done in the academy. As a result of her experience, she has developed some insights as to why students often are unable to transfer writing skills out of a general education writing course into courses in their majors.<br />
<br />
To help students understand a genre, Soliday argues that instructors should help students understand the social context the genre emerges from, writing, “If the goal is to help students to acquire written forms, then it follows that teachers need to build effective social contexts through which a novice writer becomes familiar with the typical motives that create the conventions usually associated with genres” (xi). The lack of context, Soliday suggests, is a principal reason why students do not write well.<br />
<br />
Soliday also suggests that instructors should have common approaches to the teaching of writing, which would help students transfer general principles of rhetoric across different disciplines (xiii). She proposes that a focus on genre as a concept could help to accomplish this goal, provided students are immersed in the types of social situations in which genres operate and aren’t left to figure things out for themselves in an apprenticeship type model (14-15).<br />
<br />
Overall, the WAC program at CUNY appears to have been a success with students generally declaring themselves more engaged and that they learned more of the content of the courses through a writing intensive approach (31). Soliday writes, “If teachers can articulate the purpose given to a genre by the social group that awards it meaning in the first place, inexperienced writers will more fully grasp the conventions of the genre because they understand their readers’ expectations” (34). So, one way we could improve student writing at Ursuline perhaps is by focusing on genre and context in a similar manner as CUNY did. Soliday also finds that sequencing assignments, breaking them down into parts, and focusing on idea generation (brainstorming or what rhetoricians would call invention) also played useful roles in improving student learning and writing (77), ideas we could also emulate in just about any course. Soliday’s book is a powerful reminder that the responsibility for improving student writing stretches across the curriculum to every course and every instructor.<br />
<br />
The book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-14981982490191792642013-02-20T11:33:00.000-08:002013-05-14T08:15:11.588-07:00The Evolution of College English: Literacy Studies from the Puritans to the Postmoderns by Thomas P. Miller<strong>Miller, Thomas P. <em>The Evolution of College English: Literacy Studies from the Puritans to the Postmoderns.</em> Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh P, 2011. Print.</strong><br />
<br />
In his book <em>When Can You Trust The Experts?: How to Tell Good Science from Bad in Education</em>, cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham notes that “Historians have pointed out that there is a pattern of education theories being tried, found wanting, and then reappearing under a different name a decade or two later” (95). Therefore, some value exists in knowing history, which brings me to <em>The Evolution of College English</em>. Though the book serves as much as an argument for the future of English as a discipline as it does a history of the discipline’s past, it is the past that is most useful for our purposes, from interesting tidbits such as that early creative writing courses were “especially common in women’s colleges” (142) to more germane material such as how writing and writing courses came to be a staple of American higher education (125).<br />
<br />
Along those lines (whether handwritten, typed, or word-processed as writing technology progressed), you probably complain about the quality of your students’ writing. You aren’t alone. Just as Miller points out that “professionalism is the unifying ideology of the middle class” (173), complaining about student writing is the unifying lament of educators, who have been doing just that since at least the 19th Century. In fact, it was precisely that complaint that led to the first required composition course in colleges and universities. We don’t have required composition at Ursuline, but our Ursuline Studies courses often have a composition aspect to them. Then, as now, a course focusing on general writing skills can be helpful, but it won’t prepare students for writing in your specific discipline because too many of the written conventions and expectations will be different and specific to your discipline. This misunderstood aspect of writing can make undergraduate education what composition scholar Richard Haswell calls, in his article “Teaching of Writing in Higher Education,” an “instructional minefield” for students (340). As a result, you will still complain about student writing until you realize that it’s your job to teach writing in your discipline. As Miller’s book demonstrates, despite efforts even by English departments themselves to farm out the teaching of writing to others, the literacy expected of college students continues to be a collegewide concern and should be a collegewide endeavor. Complaining about the quality of high schools or freshman college courses will never solve anything because even if those experiences prepared students perfectly for your course, students would still be lacking the literate practices that only you can teach them. <br />
<br />
The book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-49212785547854011362013-01-30T11:44:00.001-08:002013-05-14T08:14:50.673-07:00Clueless in Academe: How Schooling Obscures the Life of the Mind by Gerald Graff<strong>Graff, Gerald.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><em>Clueless
in Academe:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How Schooling Obscures the
Life of the Mind</em>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>New Haven:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yale U P, 2003.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Print.<o:p></o:p></strong><br />
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span></b><br />
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"></span></b>Despite Graff’s best efforts, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Clueless in Academe</i> still reads like
what essentially it is, a collection of his essays from the previous decade,
rather than a unified text and coherent book-length argument about how
educational institutions, especially colleges and universities, could better develop
student potential for argumentation and intellectual inquiry.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Nevertheless, the book and its diversity of
material provide many useful ideas.<o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">O</span>ne of
Graff’s most important ideas is that students need to see models of the
intellectual discourse that they are supposed to produce.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>He cites the experience of a college English
instructor who found that students wrote better essays when they read not only literature
but also criticism about that literature (163).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Though Graff is careful to note that students cannot just be given any
criticism as some will be just too far-removed from their understanding (174), he
makes a strong case for providing better models for student writing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It is surprising that this pedagogical approach
is so rare.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Would a baseball coach make her
or his players watch tennis matches and then expect they would be able to be
better baseball players as a result?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Hey, both sports involve balls and hitting them with modified sticks,
right?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yet, such mismatches happen a lot
in education. Many instructors have students read stories but want them to write essays, a different type of writing.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If, as instructors, we
want students to produce a certain genre or type of writing, then we would be
wise to show them some models of it first.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Otherwise, students are left essentially on their own to create a genre,
and, in most cases, they don’t succeed.<o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">T</span>o help
students along in learning academic genres, Graff proposes another important
idea, that of the template, an idea that he developed further with books such
as <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">They Say/I Say:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing</i>.
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Basically, to help students make
academic arguments, Graff suggests having the students fill out templates such
as “Whereas X argues that . . . , I contend that . . .” (169).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Otherwise, he notes, “These moves seem
disarmingly simple, but they are often hellishly perplexing for inexperienced
writers” (168-69).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The templates make
the necessary moves utterly transparent.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Much of academic writing is formulaic; Graff suggests we embrace that
aspect, so students can concentrate on content and enter the academic
conversation.<o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">A</span>nd
entering a conversation is ultimately what Graff and most instructors want
students to be able to do.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In fact,
Graff’s endorsement of using topics that students are interested in to teach
students the conventions and methods of academic inquiry (226) supports the
Stage I Ursuline Studies anchors approach to research, in which students pick a
personal topic to research. In those courses, the goal is to teach college-level research; the topic doesn't matter so why not let it be something that would engage a student? Then, once students have the skills, those same skills can be employed throughout the curriculum, whether the student has an initial interest in the topic or not. <br />
<br />
Other useful bits of the book
include a handy explanation to students about how and why to use quotations in
academic writing (241-42) and an epilogue that instructs students and teachers
in how to write an argument (275-77).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Given how Graff bounces around ideawise in the book, he might want to follow some of his own advice. For that reason, I wouldn't suggest reading the book straight through; instead, bounce around yourself, according to your interest. Graff has many good ideas in these essays. </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-US;">The book is available through OhioLINK.</span>Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-31897041874332455672013-01-07T13:12:00.000-08:002013-05-14T08:14:31.615-07:00The Shadow Scholar: How I Made A Living Helping College Kids Cheat by Dave Tomar<strong>Tomar, Dave.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><em>The Shadow Scholar:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>How I Made a Living Helping College Kids
Cheat</em>.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>New York:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Bloomsbury, 2012.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Print.<o:p></o:p></strong><br />
<br />
Dave Tomar, a former writer
for an academic paper mill, has crafted an entertaining, albeit also
horrifying, memoir of his days (and nights) cranking out essays for college
students.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Though Tomar’s story is
interesting, the implications of his experience are more noteworthy.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>According to Tomar, people can make a living
helping students cheat through college, which is an indictment of the current
state of higher education.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
Unlike conventional
plagiarism where a student swipes some text from the Internet or whatnot and
presents it as her or his own, paid for plagiarism is much more difficult to
detect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Indeed, aside from using
in-class writing assignments to prevent it entirely, paid for plagiarism may be
nearly impossible to detect.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>But, beyond
the question of detection, why are so many students so desperate to pass a college
course that they will cheat?<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
According to Tomar, “For
many people of the Millennial generation, there is a rational pragmatism to
cheating that did not exist for previous generations” (19).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In other words, in a world where the value of
an education has essentially been degraded to a certification which provides
financial benefit (for example, qualifying for a job), cheating makes a certain
sense in a cost-benefit analysis.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The
likelihood of getting caught is low, and the rewards can be substantial.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since college is viewed anyway as an
expensive scam by some students, those students see no ethical problems in
spending a bit more to employ someone such as Tomar to ease their passages
through college.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In their eyes, if one
needs to get a clogged sink fixed, one hires a plumber; similarly, if one needs
to get an A on a paper, then one hires a professional writer.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
In addition to telling
his personal story, Tomar comments extensively on the issues within higher
education that have led to the flourishing of his former profession.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>These include the increasingly
impersonalization and bureaucracy of many large educational institutions (25),
the increasingly higher cost of college (56), Internet entrepreneurs willing to
provide a commercial service regardless of the nature of the service (75), the
accessibility of knowledge on the Internet (81), the growth of the entitlement
mentality among students and their parents (106), the growth in for-profit
institutions (123), and so on.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We could
probably add a few of our own as well that Tomar doesn’t note, but, regardless,
his essential point stands:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Something’s
wrong with the higher education system when this can happen.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To illustrate this fact most vividly, Tomar
describes writing a doctoral dissertation in five days (177).<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
Of course, it wasn’t his
own.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
So what can be done to
guard against students cheating in such a manner?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Well, first of all, those of us in higher education
need to work on the conditions that have allowed this cheating to
flourish.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the meantime though, at the
level of the individual instructor, it might be wise to develop assignments and
assessments which can’t be gamed by bringing in a ringer such as Tomar.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For example, in-class writing assignments
effectively force students to develop their own intellectual capabilities.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Beyond guarding against people such as Tomar,
we can also lower the demand for such services in the first place.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For instance, breaking large writing assignments
down into steps may help students be more confident in their own abilities and
less likely to hire a “shadow scholar.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Thankfully,
most students probably do do their own work (if only because college is
expensive enough as is), but it’s probably good to know that this situation does
exist.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Tomar is supposedly retired now,
but it’s likely another talented writer has taken his place in the paper mill industry.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Perhaps you have read her or his work already . . .<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
The book is available
through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-9389165860558454112012-12-14T10:38:00.001-08:002013-05-14T08:14:08.179-07:00Vernacular Eloquence: What Speech Can Bring to Writing by Peter Elbow<strong>Elbow, Peter. <em>Vernacular Eloquence: What Speech Can Bring to Writing</em>. New York: Oxford U P, 2012. Print.</strong><br />
<br />
A
familiar name in Rhetoric and Composition since the 1970s, Peter Elbow appears
to intend this lengthy book as his final work.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Even if he doesn’t intend it to be his magnum opus, <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Vernacular Eloquence</i> certainly reads that way, as he seemingly has
crammed in every bit of knowledge about writing he has into the book.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I doubt many of you will have the patience to
get through this entire tome, but, in its many pages, Elbow has some good ideas
here worth discussing, so I will point out the specific areas of the book that
you might find most useful.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>His major
argument is that speech can be useful for writing in a number of ways, an idea
that we certainly can use to help our students.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>For example, if your students have trouble expressing themselves
clearly, ask them to read their writing aloud.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>Often, the ineffective portions will stand out and be easily
corrected.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This won’t work in all cases
(the Dunning-Kruger effect applies to writing as it applies to nearly
everything else), but it will help some students improve their phrasing and syntax,
as well as catch some obvious word usage misfires and other mistakes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>For that alone, it’s worth doing as part of
the writing process.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>In the book, Elbow
explores at length the many benefits of speech for writing, which go far beyond smoothing out phrasing.<br />
<br />
Other
useful bits of the book include Elbow’s explanation of his own writing process,
which might be useful for others to emulate (208); his discussion of the split
between grammatical and rhetorical punctuation styles, which might explain why various
instructors enforce very different approaches to punctuation and how students
get confused as a result (259); his commentary on how the fear of being judged
inhibits people’s writing abilities (325), his reference to how using Black
English in a writing course can help African-American students succeed in
college overall (333); his critique of how certain features of student writing
such as insisting that essays “announce their thesis in the first paragraph”
aren’t really representative of true academic writing (which is, after all,
what we’re supposed to be teaching them—students already know how to write in
general, even the ones we consider bad writers, or they couldn’t have made it
this far to begin with) (346); his suggestion that policing “proper” grammar
has much more to do with social class and gatekeeping than it does with communication
and language (354); and his reflection on how freewriting has come to be
accepted by the academy over the years (391). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Elbow’s book contains a wealth of wisdom, but
reading it is a bit like panning for gold.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>I hope I have pointed out where you are more likely to strike a mother lode.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
The
book is available in our library.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-84829559768074372232012-09-07T06:21:00.000-07:002012-09-07T06:23:15.025-07:00“An Emerging Model for Student Feedback: Electronic Distributed Evaluation” by Beth Brunk-Chavez and Annette Arrigucci<strong>Brunk-Chavez, Beth, and Annette
Arrigucci.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“An Emerging Model for
Student Feedback:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Electronic Distributed
Evaluation.”<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Composition Studies</i> 40.1 (2012):<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>60-77.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Print.</strong><br />
<br />
A conflict usually exists in the
conventional role of instructor.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One
aspect of teaching is being a coach and guiding a student along her or his
studies.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Another aspect, however, is
being an umpire and evaluating the student’s work impartially.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Since the natural tendency of an instructor
is to desire for students to do well, coupled typically with a bias to be
recognized as a good instructor, instructors may evaluate students’ work less
objectively than they should.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To combat
this tendency and give students’ accurate feedback, which is believed to be
more beneficial for students in the long term than giving them false feedback which
inflates the sense of their capabilities beyond their actual limits (leading ultimately to frustration and, at times, failure), some
colleges have looked into various means of separating out the coach and umpire
roles of instruction.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>One such college
is Texas Tech University (TTU), and in “An Emerging Model for Student Feedback:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Electronic Distributed Evaluation,” authors
Beth Brunk-Chavez and Annette Arrigucci explain how TTU’s redesign of its
composition program included a reworking of how student work is assessed in one
of their composition courses.<o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">C</span>alled
“electronic distributed evaluation,” TTU’s composition assessment involves
students uploading their writing online where it will be graded by a trained
grader who is not their classroom instructor (65).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The instructors, following the same core
standards as the graders, coach and prepare the students for the evaluation by
proving feedback on drafts of their writing (65).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Brunk-Chavez and Arrigucci argue that the
results have been mainly beneficial, with instruction and grading becoming more
cohesive across the entire program.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>It
also appears to have deflated grade inflation with the most common grade in the
course now being a B rather than an A.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>One might think that students might be upset at these changes, but,
according to a survey, most students found the new grading fair.<o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">W</span>hile
we do not have the same needs as TTU, which is a large university, instructors
at Ursuline could adopt, if possible and desired, a similar approach.<o:p></o:p><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span><br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;">T</span>he
article is available in the writing instruction resources mini-library in the
Ursuline Studies Program office (Mullen 318).Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-77346562718842941632012-08-24T06:46:00.002-07:002012-08-24T06:49:01.697-07:00"Goodbye, Chip" by Eileen Kohut<em>We interrupt our normal coverage on writing instruction for a bit with a post that reminds us how powerful writing can be and why we value it so much.</em><br />
<br />
Chip Hochstetler claimed with a name like “Charles Hochstetler” he should be called just “Chip.” He had graduated from Carnegie Mellon with a BS in chemistry and worked several years at Lubrizol. He must have realized he needed more people in his life, and after tutoring at Lake Erie and Lakeland, he came to Ursuline College under Director Cindy Russell and tutored chemistry and math. During that time he sat in on a statistics class and began tutoring stats to students, too. Even though stats wasn’t his field, he was always concerned with the students’ needs. His tutoring style was fashioned in individual or group sessions. Many times he ran two reviews the night before a chemistry exam. He came in at night and on weekends; he would meet students during summer school or breaks. Frequently he stayed later if the student required more time. He made up his own appointment sheet and called students himself to schedule them. In later years, he tutored nursing math, and the faculty gave him quizzes to use so that he could design his sessions to meet their individual needs. From 2001-2006, Chip met an average of 750 sessions of math or science each year. Many students wrote him personal notes about his patient help, his clear explanations and his support, especially in chemistry. Often student nurses claimed they wouldn’t have passed without his help. Chip was respected by the faculty in math, chemistry and nursing. He was a guest lecturer each year for the Women in Science and Math Day and performed a lab about the chemistry of soap. He served on the math search committee which hired Michelle Wiggins at Ursuline College.<br />
<br />
Outside of academics, Chip worked in security and maintenance and was full time for several years combining tutoring and with other responsibilities. He loved the campus and put bird feeders outside his windows and took home baby turtles. He knew where the fawns were each spring. Always concerned with the grounds, he once was reprimanded because he took a truck with a snow plow (which he could work) and cleaned off the roadway for people coming to a winter basketball game. The basketball team gave him a personalized sweatshirt that he proudly wore when he kept score at basketball games, but basketball wasn’t his favorite sport; volleyball was. While he was at Ursuline College, he helped coach the volleyball team, he built and maintained the sand volleyball court, and played with the varsity team and faculty members. During the season, he participated as a line judge and score keeper. He welcomed the visiting refs and took personal care of them. When a particularly good volleyball player came to Ursuline, he personally funded a scholarship for her for four years totally $6,000. When Chip wasn’t able to tutor last year, he came to several games and supported the teams and hall of fame inductees. During his time at Ursuline, several students invited him to be their “ Faculty” guest at specific games, and Chip was always proud to accompany a student who singled him out as a mentor or teacher. He once told his supervisor that he remembered the teachers who had made a difference for him, too.<br />
<br />
While Chip's parents were alive, Chip was devoted to them; his dad died nine years ago and his mom lingered in poor health for several years afterwards. Chip brought in aides and support to keep Mrs. Hochstetler at home. He scheduled a variety of activities during the winter to keep her stimulated and planted flowers everywhere on the homesite. In the past few years, he lost his brother Larry and his mother, and in 2010 took a leave to settle the family estate and prepare the family home in Lyndhurst for sale. He always hoped he could return to Ursuline, and his belongings at the college include a signed volleyball from a winning game, pictures of several basketball teams and posters of Chip at games and team schedules. Tucked inside his papers and chemistry quizzes are notes and thank you cards from many students who were articulate in their gratitude to him for the help he gave. One note in particular said, “it seems I am always thanking you for something.” Chip spent his life and talent taking care of others.<br />
<br />
<em>Eileen D. Kohut is the Director of Ursuline Resources for Success in Academics (URSA) at Ursuline College.</em>Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-88874658454366444732012-06-12T13:16:00.000-07:002012-06-12T13:19:26.557-07:00“Transferability and Genres” by Amy Devitt<strong>Devitt, Amy. “Transferability and Genres.” <em>Locations of Composition</em>. Ed. Christopher J. Keller and Christian R. Weisser. Albany: State U of New York P, 2007. 215-27. Print.</strong><br />
<br />
A tradition of grumbling and lamenting exists in America where education and writing are concerned. It goes a little something like this. Employers complain that college graduates can’t write because their professors stunk. College professors complain their students can’t write because the students' high school teachers stunk. And so on and so forth until presumably even the kindergarten teacher moans about the quality of a child’s parenting. <br />
<br />
What’s going on here?<br />
<br />
Composition scholar Amy Devitt provides a possible answer in her essay. She argues that general writing skills don’t exist (cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham, whose work I’ve written about recently, would disagree at least slightly), and that writing “is a highly situated act” embedded in specific genres, which are patterns of text developed in response to recurrent social situations (215-16). When student writers fail, it’s often because they are misapplying a previously-learned genre to a new situation. She uses the example of new associates in a law firm who write analytic memos by relying too heavily on their law school genres, with predictably substandard results. However, those associates who wrote the worst memos typically wrote the worst in law school as well, and Devitt attributes their greater failure to not learning the previous genres as well as they should have. She writes, “The genres that writers know constitute their genre repertoires, and writers draw from their repertoires to write in a new situation” (223).<br />
<br />
What does this mean for us as college instructors?<br />
<br />
Devitt recommends that we focus on teaching a few genres well in our classes, with an eye on how they can be used in the future (that’s the transferability part of the essay), as well as teach students about genres as a concept, so they’ll be better prepared to analyze and utilize a new one when they need to do so. Students will still struggle to learn a new genre, but it’ll likely be more akin to huffing up a San Francisco hill than trying to climb Mt. Everest.<br />
<br />
We'll probably never stop employers complaining about us though. Or stop complaining about high school teachers. Nevertheless, now we can do more than throw up our hands in frustration.<br />
<br />
The essay collection is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-24548870991313594842012-06-06T11:40:00.000-07:002012-06-06T11:40:49.125-07:00Why Don’t Students Like School?: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions about How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom by Daniel T. Willingham<b>Willingham, Daniel T. <i>Why Don’t Students Like School?: A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions about How the Mind Works and What It Means for the Classroom</i>. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass-Wiley, 2009. Print.</b><br />
<br />
Although aimed at K-12 instructors, Willingham’s book can also be useful for college instructors. In the book, he discusses in detail nine principles supported by years of research, and examines how they might be utilized in the classroom. The principles are: “People are naturally curious, but they are not naturally good thinkers; unless the cognitive conditions are right, we will avoid thinking” (3), “Factual knowledge must precede skill” (19), “Memory is the residue of thought” (41), “We understand new things in the context of things we already know, and most of what we know is concrete” (67), “It is virtually impossible to become proficient at a mental task without extended practice” (81), “Cognition early in training is fundamentally different from cognition later in training” (97), “Children are more alike than different in terms of how they think and learn” (113), “Children do differ in intelligence, but intelligence can be changed through sustained hard work” (131), and “Teaching, like any complex cognitive skill, must be practiced to be improved” (147). A chapter is then devoted to each principle.<br />
<br />
Willingham is an engaging writer, and the book offers good advice on how to improve student learning. Some advice will strike instructors as just plain common sense, but much of the book challenges current pedagogical thinking. For example, Willingham suggests that modifying teaching styles to match the learning styles of students (or “multiple intelligences” as they are sometimes called) has little effect and is probably a waste of energy (120).<br />
<br />
The book is available in the Ursuline library.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-77328239821974271512012-05-17T08:20:00.000-07:002012-05-17T08:21:41.788-07:00"The Duke Reader Project: Engaging the University Community in Undergraduate Writing Instruction" by Cary Moskovitz<b>Moskovitz, Cary. "The Duke Reader Project: Engaging the University Community in Undergraduate Writing Instruction." <i>Liberal Education</i> 97.3/4 (2011): 48-53. <i>Academic Search Complete</i>. Web. 17 May 2012.</b><br />
<br />
Many instructors at Ursuline have experienced the following phenomenon: Students turn in their final essays at the end of the semester, but seldom ever return the following semester to pick up the essays and read instructor comments, from which, of course, they could learn and thus write better in the future. Perhaps students just forget and get too caught up in the following semester's classload and activities, but it's likely that many students honestly don't care for feedback other than the grade, which they've already received. Those students are not engaged in their writing. They see it as a hoop to jump through rather than a means for learning that can still be learned from even after the grade has been turned in.<br />
<br />
If this has happened to you, don't feel bad and don't take it personally. It's a phenomenon that happens nationwide. To counteract this disengagement and make students more invested in their writing and more likely to grow from it, Duke University has developed a program called the Duke Reader Project. Because Duke, like most higher education institutions, considers writing to be of paramount importance for learning, the University wants students to view writing less as a schoolbound activity that one directs to an instructor and performs for a grade, and more as a "contextual act" that has real world consequences and varies from situation to situation, as well as from discipline to discipline, often driven by the needs of different audiences (48).<br />
<br />
To teach students the importance of writing and how it functions outside of an individual course, Duke makes students write for an audience beyond the instructor by pairing a student up with a volunteer professional in the student's field. Often, these volunteers are graduates of Duke and eager to interact with students. After being paired up, the student corresponds with the volunteer and then shares drafts of an assignment for feedback. Thus far, the project appears to be very successful with both students and volunteers pleased with the results. Cary Moskovitz, Director of Writing in the Disciplines in the Thompson Writing Program at Duke, reports that "For our students, the project offers the opportunity to get detailed feedback on multiple drafts of their papers from engaged readers who are familiar with the kinds of writing they are attempting. For our alumni and our many non-instructor employees, it offers a valued and interesting way to be directly involved in our educational mission. For our institution, it builds meaningful connections between segments of our community that rarely intersect" (52). Duke's innovative program is one that other institutions such as Ursuline could emulate. In fact, Tiffany Mushrush Mentzer, Director of Alumnae Relations, has indicated that many Ursuline alums would be open to participation in a similar project here, so if you are an instructor wishing to have your students be more engaged in their writing and learn how to write for different audiences, please contact her. She can put you in touch with interested alums, and you can give a similar program a try here. If so, then you might find that students start stopping by to pick up those final papers and see what you think about their work beyond the grade as well.<br />
<br />
The article is available through our library's databases.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-90988924593394048092011-12-05T09:29:00.000-08:002011-12-05T09:37:55.627-08:00"Assessing and Teaching What We Value: The Relationship between College-level Writing and Critical Thinking Abilities" by Condon and Kelly-Riley<strong>Condon, William, and Diane Kelly-Riley. "Assessing and Teaching What We Value: The Relationship between College-level Writing and Critical Thinking Abilities." <em>Assessing Writing</em> 9 (2004): 65-75. <em>OhioLINK Electronic Journal Center</em>. Web. 14 Nov. 2011.</strong><br /><br />Many scholars seem to just assume that writing promotes critical thinking, akin to a faithlike belief in a higher, supernatural power, but don't provide compelling evidence and explanations of how that can be done. Fortunately, in a study conducted at Washington State University (WSU), Condon and Kelly-Riley actually investigated the link between critical thinking and writing. Unfortunately, they found bad news for the "If they write it, then they will critically think" crowd. They looked at student writing using a critical thinking rubric called "The WSU Guide to Rating Critical Thinking." Some classes had incorporated the guide into instruction, and, probably not surprisingly, those classes showed better critical thinking than classes which did not use the guide. What was surprising, however, was that the classes that showed better critical thinking also showed worse writing and vice versa. The authors note, "The inverse correlation, [sic] and then the lack of relationship between our writing assessment scores and critical thinking scores point to what anecdotal evidence has long supported. Oftentimes, raters in our Writing Assessment Program comment that the exams seem to show sound writing abilities, but really contain no critical thought, or are vacuous or superficial. Haswell's research (1991) indicates that when writers take risks with new ways of thinking, often their writing breaks down in structure as the student grapples with a new way of thinking" (65-66). The authors thus suggest that writing alone will not promote critical thinking. What will promote critical thinking includes explicitly laying out expectations for students including values and features of the individual discipline being taught (65).<br /><br />Ultimately, the authors argue that "Writing acts as a <em>vehicle</em> for critical thinking, but writing is not itself critical thinking" (66). They provide helpful advice for how to promote critical thinking in the classroom, most of which involves explicitly clarifying expectations for critical thinking (66). The authors also go on to discuss issues with using timed writing situations to assess anything beyond superficial writing traits (67-68). Though writing clearly has a place in using courses to promote critical thinking, writing by itself isn't a substitute for the critical thinking, and instructors should be careful to assess the thinking and not just the writing.<br /><br />The article is available in the OhioLINK Electronic Journal Center.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-13008651204916434592011-10-24T07:32:00.000-07:002011-10-24T07:36:20.737-07:00Overall Writing Instruction GuidelinesIf one were looking for some quick and general guidance on teaching writing, then the National Council of Teachers of English's (NCTE) <a href="http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/writingbeliefs">beliefs</a> would be a good place to find it.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-21028420642779185282011-10-05T05:43:00.001-07:002011-10-05T05:48:38.199-07:00National Day on WritingThe National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) has named October 20th as this year's <a href="http://www.ncte.org/dayonwriting">National Day on Writing</a>, a day that celebrates the importance of the written word. This will mark the third year that NCTE has had this event. Ursuline participated in the first National Day on Writing by having <a href="http://galleryofwriting.org/galleries/gallery_pieces.php?galleryid=156018">our own gallery</a> as part of NCTE's National Gallery of Writing. The galleries were initially supposed to be closed down after a few months, but the entire event was such a success that they remained open. So if anyone has anything they would like to contribute to showcase the many types of writing done at Ursuline on a daily basis, please contact me via the information on the sidebar.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-66982417576168536782011-09-20T10:12:00.000-07:002012-06-01T12:15:56.973-07:00Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy by Anis S. Bawarshi and Mary Jo ReiffBawarshi, Anis S., and Mary Jo Reiff. <em>Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy</em>. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press, 2010. WAC Clearinghouse. Web. 29 Aug. 2011.<br /><br />At Ursuline, we write in genres every day, whether academic essays, emails, lab reports, or lesson plans. How people use genres has been a fascinating question for scholars to explore. In this book, the authors provide an overview of genre theory from several perspectives including linguistics, literary studies, rhetoric, and sociology. Though seemingly abstract at the surface level, the topic of genres is important for pedagogy and our day to day activities in the classroom. Many times, it is precisely genre that students are having difficulty with when writing in a new and unfamiliar discipline, and the authors communicate the insights of several decades of research into genres.<br /><br />Though not all scholars are in agreement, most who have researched genres suggest that the explicit teaching of genres to students will best assist them in utilizing genres. An interesting approach to teaching genre comes from the Australian-based systemic-functional school, which involves what is called the "teaching-learning cycle" (34). In this cycle, students are first exposed to various examples of a particular genre and invited to analyze them. Next, students and teachers work together to construct an example of the genre. After this collaboration, students create an example of the genre on their own. For example, if I were to teach students how to write a research essay, we would read several examples of research essays first, then we would work together to write a research essay, and, finally, the students would write research essays of their own. This method, though not without its critics, has been implemented successfully at all grade levels including higher education.<br /><br />Teaching genres seem to be particularly successful if the instructor can communicate to students that genres are not mere formulas but instead "dynamic, situated actions" (17) that "help organize and generate social practices and realities" (20). The authors are critical of the hackneyed teaching of universal modes of writing such as description and narration, feeling that form is typically overemphasized whereas a true understanding of genre always involves content and context as well. To replace such traditional but untheoretically-sound pedagogical approaches, after discussing the theory and research into genres earlier, the authors discuss some interesting pedagogical approaches to teaching writing in Part 3 of the book, which concludes with a handy glossary and annotated bibliography (a genre, incidentally that has been difficult for students at Ursuline).<br /><br />In conclusion, the book is a valuable primer on genre theory and well worth reading. Even more valuable though is to stop and consider what genres you utilize in your courses and how you expect students to master them. Are you depending too much on tacit knowledge that you hold but the students do not? Or are you explicitly guiding the students through what is for them new rhetorical territory? Getting students to think about genre explicitly can help them to transfer their skills and enable them to recognize and negotiate new genres and situations in the future (190). As the authors vividly demonstrate, genre is worth thinking about for instructors and students alike.<br /><br />The book is available for free online at <a href="http://wac.colostate.edu/books/bawarshi_reiff/">http://wac.colostate.edu/books/bawarshi_reiff/</a>.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-71966570178279224012011-06-06T09:20:00.001-07:002011-06-06T09:21:26.206-07:00Summer BreakAnother academic year has ended so the blog will be taking a summer break. Please look for new posts in Fall 2011.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-53798535583336778692011-05-11T08:24:00.000-07:002011-05-11T08:45:20.449-07:00Lowering Higher Education: The Rise of Corporate Universities and the Fall of Liberal Education by James E. Cote and Anton L. AllaharCote, James E., and Anton L. Allahar. <em>Lowering Higher Education: The Rise of Corporate Universities and the Fall of Liberal Education</em>. Buffalo, NY: U of Toronto P, 2011. Print.<br /><br />This book is the sequel to <em>Ivory Tower Blues</em>, which I have also written about on the blog, and the authors continue to explore the themes and concerns of the earlier book. In fact, you could probably read either book and get the gist of the other. However, since this book is more recent, I’d suggest reading it instead of the previous book. In both books, the authors are concerned that higher education has lost its way, abandoning the traditions of the liberal arts for the economic appeal of “<em>pseudo-vocational </em>training,” an approach that threatens to capsize the whole university enterprise: "These programs have been rebranded to promise that they will give students an edge in the competition for jobs. As this has happened, the pedagogical value of the liberal <em>education</em> in stimulating critical thinking abilities, and honing the skills associated with effectively communicating those abilities in writing and speech, is diminishing; thus, as universities adopt teaching practices associated with <em>training</em> people to remember formulae, systems of facts, and procedures, rather than <em>educating </em>them to develop a critical awareness of the world at large that they can defend epistemologically, we witness a fundamental alteration in the structure and function of the traditional university and its curriculum" (4). For writing instruction, this approach manifests itself in a lack of significant writing assignments, and, consequently, a lack of transformative opportunities for intellectual growth (86-87). The authors make a number of recommendations (177-78) to remedy matters, but only a societywide initiative is likely to succeed, for, as the authors note, the crisis in higher education stems from misguided government policies that promote higher education as the one-size-fits-all answer to questions of economic development (91). Furthermore, the authors suggest that student disengagement doesn’t stem from universities not embracing multiple ways of learning (127) or utilizing new technology (the entirety of chapter 6), nor from students working more hours to pay for college (139), but from a basic academic permissiveness in which the majority of students achieve above-average grades for what logically and statistically must include some below-average work (69). They ask, “why would someone try harder in their courses when high grades are so easily obtained, especially someone who prefers socializing or making some money on the side?” (144). But, without an effort on the part of the individual student, he or she will not achieve the benefit of a college education, an assertion of the authors that will likely find support in any reader of this blog (65). Therefore, in order to guarantee that students must exert themselves in their studies, colleges and universities should fight grade inflation and the accompanying relaxation of academic standards.<br /><br />The good news is that at Ursuline we already employ many of the approaches that the authors recommend, such as a focus on developing the critical thinking skills of students (the epistemic positions discussed on 95-97 resemble those from <em>Women’s Ways of Knowing</em>), which is ironic since much of our curriculum might be viewed by the authors as pseudo-vocational. Apparently the core curriculum’s base in liberal education may be moderating the effects of the issues negatively affecting higher education. In any case, I hope that we don’t offer a “BA-lite” here, a trend that the authors see growing, with the more rigorous, traditional liberal arts education being discarded (6). But, like other institutions, we may do well to remember and resist the current fashionable metaphor of the college as corporation: students aren’t customers; instead, they are better understood as raw commodities “to be transformed in some way by the experience, not a consumer of knowledge or a credential” (78). The authors conclude that if things do not change, most colleges and universities “will pretend to teach students at a level of higher education, and students will pretend to learn at that level, but the truth will be that universities are simply providing empty degrees that are little more than expensive ‘fishing licenses’ for lower-level white-collar jobs” (191), resulting in a terrifying situation for both higher education and the rest of society.<br /><br />The book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-76786560505861276132011-04-14T12:49:00.000-07:002011-05-11T08:41:55.009-07:00Teaching Writing Online: How and Why by Scott WarnockWarnock, Scott. <em>Teaching Writing Online: How and Why</em>. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 2009. Print.<br /><br />Instructors preparing to teach a hybrid or online course for the first time will likely find Warnock’s book useful as a roadmap for this new teaching environment. Though he concentrates on teaching composition, Warnock provides valuable guidance for any instructor utilizing writing in her or his course. He explains well how traditional classroom features can be adapted to online courses and the transformations that might result. For example, instructors may find themselves replacing some of the formal writing assignments in their courses with more informal writing assignments since class “discussion” in an online course may be entirely composed of writing (134-35). He also prepares instructors for potential pitfalls such as changes in student expectations. For example, instructors who do not clarify contact hours may find students who expect the instructor to always be available even in the middle of the night (40-41). Overall, the book can serve as a life preserver for those lost in the electronic sea of pedagogy.<br /><br />The book is available through OhioLINK, but we hope to add a copy to the writing instruction mini-library in Mullen 318 soon.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-8289271872207433112011-04-11T10:25:00.000-07:002011-05-11T08:41:39.115-07:00Ivory Tower Blues: A University System in Crisis by James E. Cote and Anton L. AllaharCote, James E., and Anton L. Allahar. <em>Ivory Tower Blues: A University System in Crisis</em>. Buffalo, NY: U of Toronto P, 2007. Print.<br /><br />This book could come across as a rant about the loss of the good old days in higher education by two old and grumpy professors, except the authors present copious evidence that colleges and universities have lost their way a bit in the past few decades and the current problems besieging higher education (the recent arguments that students don’t learn anything, the complaints about the costs of tuition rising faster than inflation, the lawsuits from graduates having trouble finding jobs, and so forth) will only persist and worsen as the trends lamented by the authors continue. Overall, the authors argue that North American society has emphasized the importance of a college degree so much that an “arms race” in amassing degrees has taken place with unintended consequences of student disengagement, grade inflation, and the watering down of the value of a degree. The authors diagnose these problems and others, and present some potential solutions, but since this blog focuses on writing instruction, I will confine my review to how these issues affect student writing.<br /><br />The problems the authors note explain much of the problems instructors see with student writing. Many times, I have witnessed a student get a paper returned, look at the grade, ignore the comments, and toss the paper in the trash can (or at best the recycling bin) when leaving class (I am sure I am not alone in witnessing this scenario as well; if you think this doesn’t happen in your classes, look in the trash after you return papers next time). The student who tosses a paper in the trash clearly not only doesn’t value her or his own writing, but also doesn’t value anything the instructor has to say about it. With such an approach, this student will never improve her or his writing much. Such a student is a model of what Cote and Allahar call “The Disengaged Student” (16). This student has been trained by the pre-college educational system to expect high grades for low work. To such a student, the work itself has little to no value on its own; it is just the latest in a series of hoops that he or she has resigned herself or himself to jump through in order to get credentialed so that he or she can get a higher-paying job after graduation. To such a student, a professor is just a gatekeeper to a middle-class lifestyle, merely an obstacle to be overcome, like the guard of a treasure vault to be disposed of by the hero in an action movie. Little wonder then that such a student doesn’t view college as transformational, or value learning for its own sake, or even see it as a means to develop skills that might be valuable down the road (and it takes very little forethought and enlightened self-interest to take the third approach). In the past, the authors claim, such students would have been drummed out of college quickly or would not even have entered it in the first place.<br /><br />Today, they graduate.<br /><br />What has happened to higher education?<br /><br />Cote and Allahar are careful not to blame such a student entirely, as to a certain extent he or she is responding rationally to the environment he or she lives in. They do note that such students are short-sighted, but they place most of the blame on the conditions that allow such students to . . . well, “flourish” isn’t the right word, perhaps “subsist” fits better. They note a variety of causes including the emphasis on self-esteem as opposed to self-efficacy (70), “credentialism” (25), the high cost of college leading to students working which takes away from time available for studying (108), systems of faculty promotion that consider student evaluations (35), the use of “pre-digested” textbooks instead of primary materials (136-37), viewing a college education in economic terms rather than educational terms (127), and the overreliance on adjunct instructors (91), all of which converge to make writing an essay in college, for most students, “a detached experience with little meaning and transformative potential beyond meeting another deadline” (136).<br /><br />About the only good news that the book offers is that at Ursuline we already do incorporate many of the solutions the authors recommend such as emphasizing analytical essays, having students do verbal presentations, offering career counseling, focusing on identity formation, and providing a mission and educational philosophy, among others (93-101). However, we still have many of the problems the authors describe, for the reason they state, “the causes ultimately lie with the wider society.” They encourage those of us in higher education to raise awareness of these issues in the public sphere and encourage society not to view a university education as the path for all. They write: "In short, university teaching of the liberal arts is about the dissemination of knowledge and the preparation of well-rounded citizens, and we are concerned that this is in jeopardy as more and more students have been told to use the liberal arts degree as a status symbol to gain access to white collar occupations. While some of these students clearly benefit and go on to combine their liberal education with some sort of vocational or professional training, as we have argued, it appears that the liberal education side of this equation has increasingly been given short shrift. The fault lies with policies and practices that 'sell' the undergraduate degree as something amorphously 'good' for labour-force [sic] entry or as a qualification for professional schools, and is manifested in the growing numbers of disengaged and partially engaged students enrolling in courses that should be demanding a fuller commitment to deep learning. These policies and practices simply encourage large numbers of students to look at some obscure future horizon without appreciating the opportunities at hand in the present to transform and enrich themselves. Giving them 'soft' (inflated) grades in return for their tuition money simply bypasses the philosophy of the liberal education and undermines the fiduciary duty that the university system has had to both preserve and advance civilization" (185). The authors suggest that without taking steps to reverse these trends more than a student essay might end up in the trash.<br /><br />The book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-45547847819072788462011-03-23T11:17:00.000-07:002011-04-14T12:52:35.159-07:00Ghosts in the Classroom: Stories of College Adjunct Faculty—and the Price We All Pay edited by Michael DubsonDubson, Michael, ed. <em>Ghosts in the Classroom: Stories of College Adjunct Faculty—and the Price We All Pay</em>. Boston: Camel’s Back Books, 2001. Print.<br /><br />Based on their transcripts, transfer students arriving at Ursuline should be familiar with MLA format, the academic essay genre, and how to spell “they are,” among other niceties of writing. At the first class, the student may even tell you that he or she has written a research paper before and has all the knowledge and skills needed that your course is supposed to provide (usually in the midst of a complaint about having to take your class in the first place, particularly if it’s outside of her or his major, implying, if not explicitly stating, that he or she considers your class a waste of her or his time).<br /><br />Then when this "superstar" student turns in her or his first piece of writing for your course, it’s horrible.<br /><br />What’s going on here?<br /><br /><em>Ghosts in the Classroom</em>, a collection of essays written by adjunct instructors, helps to explain why transfer students often arrive at Ursuline without the writing skills they should. The book also vividly details larger problems in American higher education such as exploitation, greed, and incompetence, but since this blog’s focus is on writing instruction, that will be my focus in this post.<br /><br />Like most adjuncts, the writers of the essays in the book appear to be dedicated and talented instructors, but they work under impossible conditions. Because pay for adjuncts is so low, many adjuncts string together multiple classes at various colleges and universities in order to put together a living wage. This situation is far removed from the adjunct ideal of the working professional who is noble enough to teach the occasional course in her or his field of expertise in order to give back to the community or discipline. Exacerbated by a variety of factors, most principally by the oversupply of college instructors in relation to demand that makes for cheap and contingent labor, higher education has come to rely on adjuncts to teach many, many courses, leaving them and the rest of us exasperated. Michael Dubson, the editor of Ghosts, claims that 50% of all college faculty members are adjuncts (vii), a percentage that likely has only grown in the ten years since the book’s publication. Furthermore, as we all know, adjuncts teach many introductory courses since full-time faculty often prefer, or are the only ones qualified to teach, upperlevel courses, so many of our transfer students arrive having essentially been taught by adjunct faculty. The stories in the book vividly explain what our transfer students likely experience before they arrive at Ursuline. For example, an English instructor, Kate Gale (which may not be her real name since many of the adjuncts, for obvious reasons, use pseudonyms), describes teaching at least ten classes each semester at six different colleges and universities. How is that even possible? One can say that she doesn’t have to do research or service activities so she can just concentrate on her teaching, but any time savings from those duties is surely eaten up just driving from campus to campus. And Gale teaches writing, making her courses even more labor intensive than many others. With at least ten classes to juggle, she surely has trouble providing the bare minimum of instruction for her students, and that's assuming a superhuman effort on her part.<br /><br />Without much guidance, how then do the students pass such a course? Are they superhuman as well?<br /><br />No, likely they pass because it is in the system’s interest to have them pass. Students who fail a course often drop out entirely. Instructors, particularly adjunct instructors whose jobs are tenuous and often dependent on receiving good student evaluations, have a motivation to pass even the worst students, as Andrew Guy illustrates by recounting the story of how he gave an A to a plagiarizing student named Shirley: “She didn’t give a damn about the class, and she also knew--as I had not realized until that very moment—that I didn’t give a damn either, not even about so much as trying to teach her the basics of right and wrong” (125-26). Guy would like to fail the plagiarizing student, but he realized that pursuing proof of her infraction would only lead him to the unemployment line, so he, like seemingly everyone else in higher ed these days, pursued the path of least resistance. Can we blame him?<br /><br />Probably not. Guy is just doing what he needs to in order to survive in his environment. The problem lies in the environment itself. Whatever the cause, the result is that Shirley ends up in our classes when she transfers to Ursuline and often gets shocked when she finds out that her writing is deficient. We aren’t perfect, nor are all other institutions to blame when students show up here underprepared. We have to work with our students wherever they are skillwise. But, <em>Ghosts in the Classroom </em>explains why so many students show up unprepared to write at the level we would expect. This is one of those problems similar <a href="http://ursulinewrites.blogspot.com/2009/12/nathan-rebekah-my-freshman-year-what.html">to those I discussed </a>last year on the blog <a href="http://ursulinewrites.blogspot.com/2009/11/blum-susan-d-my-word-plagiarism-and.html">which explained why the studying time of students had decreased over the decades with predictable results</a>. The issue is at a level above the individual instructor’s control. The only things we can do is try to improve the environment whenever we have such an opportunity so our adjunct colleagues don’t have to face such an impossible situation and our students get the full value of what they’re paying for.<br /><br />The book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-49870734192944447782011-03-16T09:15:00.000-07:002011-05-11T08:43:29.820-07:00“Podcasting and Performativity: Multimodal Invention in an Advanced Writing Class” by Leigh A. JonesJones, Leigh A. “Podcasting and Performativity: Multimodal Invention in an Advanced Writing Class.” <em>Composition Studies </em>38.2 (2010): 75-91. Print.<br /><br />This essay offers a look at an innovative strategy one instructor used in a writing course, but one that could easily be adapted to most courses. Jones had her students create a podcast as part of the writing process for a research paper. She argues that the technique can “help alleviate the counter-productive anxiety that many students feel” at the start of a major writing assignment (78). Basically, she asked her students to pair up to write and record “a short, five minute mp3 file that would educate the class about a current controversial news issue they planned to write about over the course of the semester” (83). These podcasts were then played in class and discussed. She hoped that students would be able to use the podcasts as a means of narrowing their research topics and she was pleased with the results. Her findings dovetail nicely with some recent research in composition studies that suggests that having students talk about their writing helps them produce better documents (some research has even suggested that students discussing their writing with one another informally actually has the greatest effect), though she thinks that having the students polish the talking in the form of a podcast helped the students develop a sense of authority in addition to further honing their composition skills. Her technique could easily be adapted to many courses here and, of course, podcasting can itself be a form of writing if scripts are involved, and might be a useful alternative in and of itself to a conventional writing assignment.<br /><br />The essay can be found in our writing instruction library in the Ursuline Studies Program office (Mullen 318).Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-38030927305983241042011-02-23T12:44:00.000-08:002011-02-23T13:13:55.129-08:00The Quill Is Up!Ursuline's new online showcase of student academic writing, <a href="http://www.ursuline.edu/Academics/quill.html">The Quill</a>, has its first feature, an essay by Lauren Krozser about aborigines in Australia. If you come across any outstanding student writing, please nominate it for inclusion in <i>The Quill</i>, as I hope that Lauren's essay will be the first of many to be featured on the site.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-56361163923580544712011-01-27T06:19:00.000-08:002011-04-14T12:52:57.020-07:00The Elephant in the Classroom: Race and Writing edited by Jane Bowman SmithSmith, Jane Bowman, ed. <em>The Elephant in the Classroom: Race and Writing</em>. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 2010. Print.<br /><br />This collection of essays focuses on the experiences of speakers of African American English (AAE) in the college composition classroom. Many times speakers of AAE and other dialects of English considered nonstandard have difficulty in college writing classes, where Standard American English (SAE) defines the norms of linguistic expression. Often, the speakers of other dialects of English are treated as deficient and enrolled in developmental classes. I once taught a developmental English class composed of students who as far as I could tell had only been placed in it because of their dialect. Many people might not consider this absurd, but I did and felt bad for the students who had to spend money and time taking an extra college class they probably didn’t really need to take (aside from dialectal differences, they wrote as well as any other first year college student and probably could have just taken a regular composition course--I didn't challenge their placement because it was my first time teaching the course and at the institution so I wasn't certain about the situation until much later in the course). Basically, it was the equivalent of having to take a developmental math class because one was used to using the traditional English system of measurement rather than the metric system.<br /><br />Instead of taking an approach that views such students as deficient, the writers of the essays examine why the academy typically views the students in such a way. While reading the essays, I was reminded of the old linguistic saw, popularized by Max Weinreich, that the only difference between a language and a dialect is that a language has an army and a navy. Because SAE has social prestige and power behind it, it is often viewed as more than just one dialect of English among many. And, despite the efforts of many linguists over the years to dispel the myth of one correct English, most people, including college instructors, still believe in it with the results disastrous for speakers of nonstandard dialects when they enter college. As Arthur L. Palacas reminds us in “African American Voice and Standard English,” “Often, the treatment of this language conflict in class ends up demoralizing the student, with all the attendant harmful consequences.” Consequently, the language issue may have an effect on retention, and may help to explain, in addition to other factors, why minority students and first generation college students return less frequently for a second year of college compared to their counterparts, which occurs here at Ursuline as well as nationwide (thanks to Sr. Virginia DeVinne of URSA for the Ursuline data).<br /><br />However, despite the linguistic reality that all dialects are equally grammatically complex and valid, the social reality is quite different, so in good conscience we have to find a way as instructors to give our students access to what Jennifer Liethen Kunka, one of the book’s contributors, calls “linguistic capital in the professional marketplace" (76). As Kunka notes, using the example of business process provider Office Tiger in India, other speakers/writers of English are quite willing to adopt SAE if such an adoption proves profitable, with the results that speakers/writers of English without access to SAE will be left behind economically (77). This situation provides a linguistic Gordian knot with no Alexander in sight to untie it in one bold stroke.<br /><br />Instead, we will have to muddle through somehow. To that end, the book’s contributors offer some useful advice. Palacas recommends that writing instructors: "1. Give explicit teaching about differences between standard English and [African American English] (or other varieties of English). 2. Use linguistically and culturally affirming readings. 3. Allow the student to use comfortable language in the composing stages of writing and in discussion periods when the flow of ideas and thoughts is paramount." Given that Ursuline doesn’t have a composition class per se, Palacas’s recommendations might be difficult to implement. However, if you encounter a student who appears to be speaking and writing in a nonstandard way, consider the possibility that he or she is using a dialect of English that is different from your own and is not merely a bad speaker or writer. Focus on the student’s ideas. Most dialects of English are mutually understandable. Though it may not be comfortable, it’s a good bet that you can understand the student. If you only care that the student understands the content of the course in the content and form balance of speaking/writing, that may be all you need to do. If the form part is important though (say the student is writing a research paper that might be presented at a conference), then you will have to help the student bridge her or his home language into SAE. This must be done delicately and in such a way that adds to the student’s linguistic competence.<br /><br />One good approach is as Peter Elbow advises in his essay, “Why Deny a Choice to Speakers of African American Language that Most of Us Offer Other Students.” Allow the student to compose the paper initially in her or his own dialect and then once the ideas and structure are worked out, then help the student to translate the nearly-completed document into SAE. To that end, many resources are available to you. The book <a href="http://ursulinewrites.blogspot.com/2009/06/brown-david-west-in-other-words-lessons.html">In Other Words </a>is available in the Writing Instruction Mini-Library in the Ursuline Studies Program office (Mullen 318). I am available for consultation. And this book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7924959382027021069.post-88502167632393848072011-01-19T10:44:00.000-08:002011-04-14T12:54:08.604-07:00What Is “College-Level” Writing? edited by Patrick Sullivan and Howard TinbergSullivan, Patrick, and Howard Tinberg, eds. <em>What Is “College-Level” Writing?</em> Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 2006. Print.<br /><br />This anthology presents a variety of answers to the titular question, which turns out to be more difficult a query than it may appear to be on first consideration. Writing varies across the college curriculum. Writing is not a monolithic one size fits all skill, but a complex network of activities, which can vary from discipline to discipline based on specific needs and socially constructed knowledge. However, even if what “college-level” writing exactly is can never be definitively answered by the contributors, they still offer useful advice for college instructors who assign writing.<br /><br />For example, Patrick Sullivan notes that instructors with high standards seem to spur better writing from students and that students who perceive low expectations from an instructor will produce worse work (12). Lynn Z. Bloom argues that students write better as “insiders” than they do as “outsiders” (84). She uses as an example her experiments in a course on autobiography which had students read autobiographies and then write in a similar mode, the results of which she found “varied, imaginative, on target, and—a bonus for me—virtually unplagiarizable” (86).<br /><br />Contrast Bloom’s approach with an approach typical in higher education. An instructor assigns writing of one genre for students to read and then asks the students to write a document in another genre. Often this results in the instructor wondering why the students wrote so badly, but without models to go by, students basically have to create a genre on their own, and not surprisingly they don’t do very well. For illustration, if I gave you a bunch of recipes to read and then asked you to write a lab report, how well do you think you’d write? Bloom’s approach makes much more sense. If I want students to write in a particular genre well, then, as an instructor, I should have them read examples of that genre first to get an understanding of the form.<br /><br />Another useful bit of pedagogical advice comes from Michael Dubson, who suggests that writing instructors should present good writing as the result of hard work rather than of innate talent (98). Otherwise, some students will assume they just aren’t good writers and will give up trying to improve. His essay, “Whose Paper Is This Anyway?: Why Most Students Don’t Embrace the Writing They Do for Their Writing Classes,” makes for an interesting read, as does “What Does the Instructor Want?: The View from the Writing Center,” by Muriel Harris. Harris focuses on the importance of audience awareness for good writing, using Linda Flower’s notions of “writer-based and reader-based prose” (125). Often, a student writer produces writer-based prose, which does a fine job of expressing the writer’s ideas from the writer’s perspective, but can be quite incomprehensible to readers. Teaching students to write with an audience in mind and to transform writer-based prose, often a necessary stage of composition, into reader-based prose can be of tremendous benefit to novice writers.<br /><br />Finally, for those of us who like to complain about student writing, Sheridan Blau asks, “If students could [write well] at the time they entered your class, why would we need you to teach them?” And, in our moments of despair when responding to student writing, that’s a good point to keep in mind, one of many good points to be found in this collection of essays (even including an “anti-essay”). The book is available through OhioLINK.Fred Wrighthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10033225449527833596noreply@blogger.com0