In this chapter, Williams talks about writing assignments and the importance of such assignments. As Erika Lindemann (1933b) noted, "Teachers must decide what they want students to do in an assignment, how they want them to do it, who the students are writing for, and what constitutes a successful response to the assignment. Perhaps, the most important of these factors is the need to let students know clearly what they are expected to do."
Do you agree that this is the most important of these factors?
From my experiences, especially within higher-level education, I am very rarely instructed on exactly what I am expected to do. Instead, professors often leave writing assignments open-ended, enabling students to interpret it as they wish. While this can be extremely frustrating at times since many students desperately search for a sense of direction, I can sometimes see how this type of assignment is appropriate. I do agree with Williams' idea that students seldom know what they are supposed tod o when asked to "discuss." This term, when used within a writing assignment prompt, has always left me wondering what exactly my objective is. Instead, it is better to use terms like describe or narrate or interpret or evaluate.
In addition, I strongly disagree with one of the factors included within the aforementioned quote. I do not think it is imperative that teachers tell students how they want them to complete the assignment. I have been given many assignments, particularly in college, that do not provide a step-by-step list of what I should do to complete it well. Instead, I am given prompts and then left to complete it as I see appropriate. Obviously, there are the standard guidelines; that is, MLA or APA, Times New Roman font, double-spaced, etc. And yes, I think it is important to give a minimum number of outside sources that are required, as well as the due date. But I do not agree with Williams that students are to be told exactly how they are expected to write the assignment. To me, a student should understand whether or not to use a formal tone. In just about all school work, students should demonstrate professionalism; this should be understood. Taken a step further, good writing assignments, in my opinion, are those that give students the freedom to write a piece about a given prompt in any way that he or she feels is appropriate. By pushing students to think critically, as well as creatively, teachers can strengthen students' writing skills, as well as invention skills.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Friendly City Reading Series
Today, the Friendly City Reading Series visited JMU and I was lucky to attend. It was a public reading and conversation with novelist Mary Beth Keane and nonfiction writer Gina Welch. The event is used to provide a friendly forum for a variety of writers and/or students to come together and discuss all types of literature and writing.
Keane, author of The Walking People, currently teaches at Barnard College. Her book is a tale of immigration that follows a family from a tiny village near Galway to the Manhattan.
Welch, author of In the Land Of Believers, teaches at George Washington University. Her memoir is about the complicated nature of religion as she journeys into the Evangelical church.
While the authors, on the surface, seem to have nothing in common, they share many similarities. Both authors share similar training, regional history, occupations and experience with publication.
Keane and Welch both read excerpts from their books, occasionally stopping to elaborate on topics that the audience may be unfamiliar with. Immediately after, a discussion between the authors and the audience took place. The women touched upon research and writing processes, the teaching of writing, and the world of publishing.
The Friendly City Reading Series was interesting to me, since I had never been to anything like it before. I was able to learn more about two writers, both with experiences that I'm unfamiliar with. This discussion session was informative and opened my eyes to the variety of writers that exist.
Keane, author of The Walking People, currently teaches at Barnard College. Her book is a tale of immigration that follows a family from a tiny village near Galway to the Manhattan.
Welch, author of In the Land Of Believers, teaches at George Washington University. Her memoir is about the complicated nature of religion as she journeys into the Evangelical church.
While the authors, on the surface, seem to have nothing in common, they share many similarities. Both authors share similar training, regional history, occupations and experience with publication.
Keane and Welch both read excerpts from their books, occasionally stopping to elaborate on topics that the audience may be unfamiliar with. Immediately after, a discussion between the authors and the audience took place. The women touched upon research and writing processes, the teaching of writing, and the world of publishing.
The Friendly City Reading Series was interesting to me, since I had never been to anything like it before. I was able to learn more about two writers, both with experiences that I'm unfamiliar with. This discussion session was informative and opened my eyes to the variety of writers that exist.
Monday, March 15, 2010
In The Company of Children
I found Joanne Hindley’s text compelling. Her book, In the Company of Children, is grounded in the lives of real children who study at Manhattan New School in New York City. Hindley communicates the truths of public school life, as well as how to create an effective classroom for diverse children. She calls for a meaningful change in teaching practice, while questioning tradition writing/reading instruction. I found this text interesting because of how the author offers teachers fresh ideas and strategies.
Chapter two in the text, in particular, was very informative; it is titled, “The Writer’s Notebook: Not Just for Kids.” This chapter captures the importance, and real meaning, of a writer’s notebook. As Betsey Osbourne says,
“A notebook is a receptacle, a tool, a way to hold on to things. Students should view notebooks as a document of their lives; they learn not only to honor what they see but to look in the first place. If students become more aware of the world around them, and now there is a place for these observations, then this awareness will more naturally be included in their own writing” (13).
This quote communicated the effectiveness of a writer’s notebook and how it can benefit not only students, but teachers, as well.
Hindley continues the chapter by discussing notebook selection, ways to use notebooks, and the type of writing such a book can accommodate. It wasn’t until this chapter that I recognized the true significance of a notebook, both for teachers and for students. It is certainly a concept that should be incorporated into the curriculum within a reading and/or writing course.
On page 4, Hindley states, “At the Manhattan New School, my colleagues and I pride ourselves on the fact that we share the same basic beliefs about how people learn.” Do you think this is common at most schools? Furthermore, do you think it is important for teachers to share this common belief? Or, is it beneficial to have teachers with diverse beliefs?
I somewhat disagree with Hindley's statement. I think it is imperative for teachers at a particular school to have varying beliefs about how people learn. While some fundamental beliefs should be shared by the group, I think that different perspectives can shape a more diverse learning environment. Rather than every teacher educating in the same way, it is beneficial to teach students important concepts in multiple ways.
Chapter two in the text, in particular, was very informative; it is titled, “The Writer’s Notebook: Not Just for Kids.” This chapter captures the importance, and real meaning, of a writer’s notebook. As Betsey Osbourne says,
“A notebook is a receptacle, a tool, a way to hold on to things. Students should view notebooks as a document of their lives; they learn not only to honor what they see but to look in the first place. If students become more aware of the world around them, and now there is a place for these observations, then this awareness will more naturally be included in their own writing” (13).
This quote communicated the effectiveness of a writer’s notebook and how it can benefit not only students, but teachers, as well.
Hindley continues the chapter by discussing notebook selection, ways to use notebooks, and the type of writing such a book can accommodate. It wasn’t until this chapter that I recognized the true significance of a notebook, both for teachers and for students. It is certainly a concept that should be incorporated into the curriculum within a reading and/or writing course.
On page 4, Hindley states, “At the Manhattan New School, my colleagues and I pride ourselves on the fact that we share the same basic beliefs about how people learn.” Do you think this is common at most schools? Furthermore, do you think it is important for teachers to share this common belief? Or, is it beneficial to have teachers with diverse beliefs?
I somewhat disagree with Hindley's statement. I think it is imperative for teachers at a particular school to have varying beliefs about how people learn. While some fundamental beliefs should be shared by the group, I think that different perspectives can shape a more diverse learning environment. Rather than every teacher educating in the same way, it is beneficial to teach students important concepts in multiple ways.
Wednesday, March 3, 2010
Why Study Grammar?
For me, this chapter was more insightful than those in the Williams text. As I read, I realized just how complex grammar is. The chapter reflects upon common approaches to studying grammar, the relationship between grammar study and writing improvement, the relationship between language and culture, and the social nature of error.
In the first paragraph, the author discusses both the technical and social definition of the term grammar.
"Technically, the term grammar refers to the structure or system of a language, which sounds simply enough. But socially, the term grammar can bring up images of diagramming sentences or memorizing rules and definitions, as well as confusion and boredom" (1).
When you hear or think of the term grammar, what images come up in your mind?
For me, grammar was all about memorization. My classmates and I were given grammar rule after grammar rule, and expected to study them repeatedly. I did fairly well i my classes at this point, but it only got harder from here on. As our knowledge of grammar developed, we began diagramming sentences. This was where the confusion set in for me. It took me quite a long time to master the skill of diagramming sentences. Looking back, I wonder if this truly benefited my communication skills. I feel that the relationship between oral and written communication was somwhat lost amid the grammar rules and tests.
Next, I was intrigued by the author's ideas of formality and informality. She said, "Generally (but not always), writing is considered more formal than speech. Therefore, grammatical forms that might be considered appropriate (and not errors) in speech might not be acceptable in writing" (9).
Do you agree with this belief? In other words, do you believe that writing is typically more formal than speech?
While I think that this was once a common belief, I am hesitant to believe that this is a general occurrence today. Of course, inappropriate prounoun usage is much harder to detect in speech than in writing. But, with the rise of the Web, I feel that students are writing more informally than ever. I feel that students have a difficult time distinguishing between universal and community language; in other words, they do not comprehend that text message lingo is not necessarily acceptable in a classroom setting. I think it is imperative for teachers to teach not only grammar, but the ideas of professionalism and formality. If not, students' writing and speech will both continue to be informal.
In the first paragraph, the author discusses both the technical and social definition of the term grammar.
"Technically, the term grammar refers to the structure or system of a language, which sounds simply enough. But socially, the term grammar can bring up images of diagramming sentences or memorizing rules and definitions, as well as confusion and boredom" (1).
When you hear or think of the term grammar, what images come up in your mind?
For me, grammar was all about memorization. My classmates and I were given grammar rule after grammar rule, and expected to study them repeatedly. I did fairly well i my classes at this point, but it only got harder from here on. As our knowledge of grammar developed, we began diagramming sentences. This was where the confusion set in for me. It took me quite a long time to master the skill of diagramming sentences. Looking back, I wonder if this truly benefited my communication skills. I feel that the relationship between oral and written communication was somwhat lost amid the grammar rules and tests.
Next, I was intrigued by the author's ideas of formality and informality. She said, "Generally (but not always), writing is considered more formal than speech. Therefore, grammatical forms that might be considered appropriate (and not errors) in speech might not be acceptable in writing" (9).
Do you agree with this belief? In other words, do you believe that writing is typically more formal than speech?
While I think that this was once a common belief, I am hesitant to believe that this is a general occurrence today. Of course, inappropriate prounoun usage is much harder to detect in speech than in writing. But, with the rise of the Web, I feel that students are writing more informally than ever. I feel that students have a difficult time distinguishing between universal and community language; in other words, they do not comprehend that text message lingo is not necessarily acceptable in a classroom setting. I think it is imperative for teachers to teach not only grammar, but the ideas of professionalism and formality. If not, students' writing and speech will both continue to be informal.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Technology and Writing
Charney, D. (1994). "The Effect of Hypertext on Processes of Reading and Writing." Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook, edited by E. Cushman, E. Kintgen, B. Kroll, and M. Hilligoss, pp. 85-103.
Available on class Web site.
Our assignment was to locate an article that dealt with writing and technology; however, I feel that it is important to consider literacy, as a whole, and how it is being affected by the ever-growing technology. This essay, by David Charney, highlights the challeneges that an effective hypertext would face in today's society. As the author states, "As part of a literate society, we are familiar with traditional text structures" (102). We have rhetorical theories that describe effective printed texts and how we use such theories to give advice to writers. With the rise of the Web, however, we lack corresponding theories for how to deal with hypertexts -- "especially those that push the limits with complex linkages within and between a complex set of texts" (102). Nonetheless, hypertext has the potential to fundamentally alter how we write, how we teach, and how we conceive of texts.
On page 86, Charney recognizes the ways in which hypertext will facilitate the writing process:
"A writer's invention processes (generating and selecting ideas) may profit from opportunities to freely explore source material presented in a hypertext and make novel associations... Collaborative writing may be fostered by systems that enable peers to annotate each other's drafts or that help writers integrate individually written sections into a coherent draft."
Charney understands that hypertext has the ability to enable the efficient creation and dissemination of documents of all kinds. He simply encourages researchers, teachers, and designers to ensure that hypertexts promote the work of writers, as well as readers.
Available on class Web site.
Our assignment was to locate an article that dealt with writing and technology; however, I feel that it is important to consider literacy, as a whole, and how it is being affected by the ever-growing technology. This essay, by David Charney, highlights the challeneges that an effective hypertext would face in today's society. As the author states, "As part of a literate society, we are familiar with traditional text structures" (102). We have rhetorical theories that describe effective printed texts and how we use such theories to give advice to writers. With the rise of the Web, however, we lack corresponding theories for how to deal with hypertexts -- "especially those that push the limits with complex linkages within and between a complex set of texts" (102). Nonetheless, hypertext has the potential to fundamentally alter how we write, how we teach, and how we conceive of texts.
On page 86, Charney recognizes the ways in which hypertext will facilitate the writing process:
"A writer's invention processes (generating and selecting ideas) may profit from opportunities to freely explore source material presented in a hypertext and make novel associations... Collaborative writing may be fostered by systems that enable peers to annotate each other's drafts or that help writers integrate individually written sections into a coherent draft."
Charney understands that hypertext has the ability to enable the efficient creation and dissemination of documents of all kinds. He simply encourages researchers, teachers, and designers to ensure that hypertexts promote the work of writers, as well as readers.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Kantz
In Kantz's piece, "Helping Students Use Textual Sources Persuasively," the author examines a typical college student. The student, named by Kantz as Shirley, is a typical college student with an average academic preparation. While Shirley is by no means a poor writer, she has trouble with assignments that require her to write original papers based on textual sources.
When first coming to JMU, or perhaps still to this day, did you have trouble writing researched papers that express original arguments? If so, was it because you misunderstood stories because you read them as stories? Did you expect your source to tell the truth; hence, you equated persuasive writing with making things up? Did you have trouble understanding that facts are a kind of claim and are often used persuasively to create an impression?
I know that was a whole lot at once. But I think that Kantz's claim is a very strong one. When I first came to university, I, too, read sources to find the main ideas and important facts. My main problem was that I expected factual texts to tell me "the truth". Growing up, I had been taught that textbooks were ultimately descriptions of truth. As a result, I felt that such texts would include all of the facts and reconcile conflicts.
As I took more and more writing classes, however, I learned the importance of rhetorical reading. This form of reading gives students a powerful tool for creating persuasive analysis by enabling them to move from simply summarizing to constructing a rationale argument.
Before college, I often wrote papers with a certain plan already in my head, regarding the direction that the paper would take. Now, I discover what is worth writing about as I read sources. I may have some content goals before doing so, but those goals are constantly changing as my understanding of the topic develops further.
When first coming to JMU, or perhaps still to this day, did you have trouble writing researched papers that express original arguments? If so, was it because you misunderstood stories because you read them as stories? Did you expect your source to tell the truth; hence, you equated persuasive writing with making things up? Did you have trouble understanding that facts are a kind of claim and are often used persuasively to create an impression?
I know that was a whole lot at once. But I think that Kantz's claim is a very strong one. When I first came to university, I, too, read sources to find the main ideas and important facts. My main problem was that I expected factual texts to tell me "the truth". Growing up, I had been taught that textbooks were ultimately descriptions of truth. As a result, I felt that such texts would include all of the facts and reconcile conflicts.
As I took more and more writing classes, however, I learned the importance of rhetorical reading. This form of reading gives students a powerful tool for creating persuasive analysis by enabling them to move from simply summarizing to constructing a rationale argument.
Before college, I often wrote papers with a certain plan already in my head, regarding the direction that the paper would take. Now, I discover what is worth writing about as I read sources. I may have some content goals before doing so, but those goals are constantly changing as my understanding of the topic develops further.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Romantic Rhetoric
Do you feel that centering one's teaching style on romantic rhetoric is effective in developing good writers? If so, should it be taught within elementary schools or is there a certain level at which it should be used? If you find the romantic rhetoric style to be ineffective, do you think that the current-traditional approach should be used in American education?
Romantic rhetoric, also known as expressivist rhetoric, is concerned with individual feelings and personal truth. As I read this section of the text, I found benefits both for and against this teaching style. I feel that self expression is very important. The romantic style of teaching gives students the freedom to find their voice by exploring their feelings and thoughts through self-expressive composing. On the other hand, this style of teaching neglects the academic aspect of writing by focusing solely on the individual. In order to be deemed a good writer, a piece must be honest, true, authentic, fun, etc. While these aspects are important, I feel that their needs to be more to it. Students must be able to objectively write about literature and meet academic standards of literacy. Therefore, while romantic rhetoric is beneficial, I feel that a teacher can not solely rely on this teaching method.
Romantic rhetoric, also known as expressivist rhetoric, is concerned with individual feelings and personal truth. As I read this section of the text, I found benefits both for and against this teaching style. I feel that self expression is very important. The romantic style of teaching gives students the freedom to find their voice by exploring their feelings and thoughts through self-expressive composing. On the other hand, this style of teaching neglects the academic aspect of writing by focusing solely on the individual. In order to be deemed a good writer, a piece must be honest, true, authentic, fun, etc. While these aspects are important, I feel that their needs to be more to it. Students must be able to objectively write about literature and meet academic standards of literacy. Therefore, while romantic rhetoric is beneficial, I feel that a teacher can not solely rely on this teaching method.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Student-Centered Instruction and Writing Workshops
This section of Williams' book was far more interesting than what I read last week. I was able to both understand and relate to what the author was talking about. The section about student-centered instruction, specifically, was very informative. It states, "...the process approach is based on the realization that the key to improving student writing consists of three factors: (a) asking students to write often, in meaningful contexts, (b) providing frequent feedback on work in progress, and (c) requiring numerous revisions based on that feedback" (Williams, 101). I feel that each of these factors is extremely important in the writing process. Do you feel that these factors are important in terms of successfully teaching students to be good writers?
As a journalism major, I write often and I am constantly critiqued by my peers and professors. I feel that my love for writing stems from my childhood. As a kid, my classmates and I were constantly being encouraged to write. As we wrote, we received feedback on our work and suggestions on how to improve. Perhaps most importantly, my teachers didn't make me dread the writing process. It was used as an outlet and a way for me to communicate my feelings. I still see writing in much the same way. I write often. I enjoy receiving feedback. I compose several drafts before submitting a final piece. I think each of these factors are essential and can help individual's become excellent writers.
Williams also discussed writing workshops. That is, teachers ask students to form groups and students practice the behaviors that charactize good writers. Students help each other in the drafting and revising process, while receiving advice and suggestions from their teacher. As Williams states, "These groups become collaborative teams in which students help one another succeed" (Williams, 103). I believe that this is extremely beneficial, as writers focus on writing, discussing drafts, and rewriting; rather than grammar or discussions of literature.
Do you feel that an emphasis should be placed on writing, discussing drafts, and rewriting? Or, do you think that teachers should place a heavy emphasis on grammar and class discussions about literature?
As a journalism major, I write often and I am constantly critiqued by my peers and professors. I feel that my love for writing stems from my childhood. As a kid, my classmates and I were constantly being encouraged to write. As we wrote, we received feedback on our work and suggestions on how to improve. Perhaps most importantly, my teachers didn't make me dread the writing process. It was used as an outlet and a way for me to communicate my feelings. I still see writing in much the same way. I write often. I enjoy receiving feedback. I compose several drafts before submitting a final piece. I think each of these factors are essential and can help individual's become excellent writers.
Williams also discussed writing workshops. That is, teachers ask students to form groups and students practice the behaviors that charactize good writers. Students help each other in the drafting and revising process, while receiving advice and suggestions from their teacher. As Williams states, "These groups become collaborative teams in which students help one another succeed" (Williams, 103). I believe that this is extremely beneficial, as writers focus on writing, discussing drafts, and rewriting; rather than grammar or discussions of literature.
Do you feel that an emphasis should be placed on writing, discussing drafts, and rewriting? Or, do you think that teachers should place a heavy emphasis on grammar and class discussions about literature?
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
pp. 43-53
As a class, we are able to recognize the importance of classical rhetoric. Our current writing process is derived from that of classical rhetoric; therefore, we must study the past in order to be good teachers in the future. As Williams states, "anyone who would be serious about composition needs to go back to the roods and study the classics, particularly Aristotle, and it provides a historical and theoretical rationale for viewing composition as part of a rhetorical tradition 2,500 years old" (Williams, 52).
Do you agree with Williams in that respect? In other words, do you think that an individual must have a solid understanding of classical rhetoric in order to thrive in the field of composition?
I agree, mostly, with what Williams is saying. I am firm believer in the idea that, in order to understand where you're going and how to get there, you need to reflect upon what has been in the past. By studying the history of rhetoric, writers can better understand how current composition and classical rhetoric are intertwined.
Another interesting aspect of this text can be found on page 43. Williams states, There is no evidence... that years of contact with literature develops critical thinking." Do you feel that critical thinking should be a teaching requirement? Or, do you agree with Williams' belief that the study of literature is not efficacious in developing critical-thinking skills?
Do you agree with Williams in that respect? In other words, do you think that an individual must have a solid understanding of classical rhetoric in order to thrive in the field of composition?
I agree, mostly, with what Williams is saying. I am firm believer in the idea that, in order to understand where you're going and how to get there, you need to reflect upon what has been in the past. By studying the history of rhetoric, writers can better understand how current composition and classical rhetoric are intertwined.
Another interesting aspect of this text can be found on page 43. Williams states, There is no evidence... that years of contact with literature develops critical thinking." Do you feel that critical thinking should be a teaching requirement? Or, do you agree with Williams' belief that the study of literature is not efficacious in developing critical-thinking skills?
Monday, January 25, 2010
Foundations of Rhetoric
I had a very hard time getting through Chapter 1. Not only have I taken countless classes that reflect on the foundations of rhetoric, but the author did not present it in an interesting way. I did not gain any additional insight when reading the chapter and I was left wondering what I could take away from the reading that related to the Teaching Writing course, as a whole.
Within the reading, I reflected on a couple of things. First, Isocrates proposed that three necessary factors make a good rhetorician: talent, instruction, and practice. Of these three, Isocrates felt that talent was the most important. I am interested in seeing if you, my classmates,think talent is the most significant.
Personally, I don't agree with Isocrates' belief. In fact, I think that talent may be the least essential characteristic. Rather, I think that instruction is very important. In order to improve the process and the performance, an individual must know what is expected of them and what they need to do in order to be successful. Following proper insruction, potential rhetoricians must practice, practice, practice! This idea applies to a wide variety of things. In order to excel at something, individuals must go above and beyond what is expected of them. And, lastly, talent is also something to consider. This factor is not something that can be taught. Instead, it is an innate ability.
Next, I wanted to reflect on our society, giving inadequate attention to composition in classrooms. As the author of the text noted, conditions within schools have become worse, in regard to writing classes. Colleges and society blame the public schools and, unfortunately, "most new teachers appear to abandon nearly everythin they learned about writing pedagogy after 2 years or less of full-time teaching" (Williams, 41). This is alarming and really enabled me to understand the desperate need for proper writing instruction across our country. Teachers must show children exactly why composition is so important. It is one of the most practical skills an individual can have and we must educate that to our nation's youth.
Within the reading, I reflected on a couple of things. First, Isocrates proposed that three necessary factors make a good rhetorician: talent, instruction, and practice. Of these three, Isocrates felt that talent was the most important. I am interested in seeing if you, my classmates,think talent is the most significant.
Personally, I don't agree with Isocrates' belief. In fact, I think that talent may be the least essential characteristic. Rather, I think that instruction is very important. In order to improve the process and the performance, an individual must know what is expected of them and what they need to do in order to be successful. Following proper insruction, potential rhetoricians must practice, practice, practice! This idea applies to a wide variety of things. In order to excel at something, individuals must go above and beyond what is expected of them. And, lastly, talent is also something to consider. This factor is not something that can be taught. Instead, it is an innate ability.
Next, I wanted to reflect on our society, giving inadequate attention to composition in classrooms. As the author of the text noted, conditions within schools have become worse, in regard to writing classes. Colleges and society blame the public schools and, unfortunately, "most new teachers appear to abandon nearly everythin they learned about writing pedagogy after 2 years or less of full-time teaching" (Williams, 41). This is alarming and really enabled me to understand the desperate need for proper writing instruction across our country. Teachers must show children exactly why composition is so important. It is one of the most practical skills an individual can have and we must educate that to our nation's youth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)