What exactly should be taught in composition. In your opinion, how should it be taught, and what should you do in order to know if what was taught was learned?
OK. I am going to go for a rather idealistic answer here. I will assume that students come into the class with a reasonable command of grammar and usage. And that they know how to use basic tools like a word processor, email, etc.
By the end of a composition class, students should understand the elements of the rhetorical situation and how rhetoric creates meaning, and they should be able to demonstrate this understanding in their own writing. I usually start by focusing on the writer, assigning a narrative piece. Even then, students should begin to get an idea of how the purpose and audience should inform the organization of the message. Other assignments may involve purposes such as description, comparison, or argumentation, in each case focusing on how the elements of the rhetorical situation interact. I really like Corbett's diagram as a model of dynamic balance.
A major goal is to help students understand what counts as evidence (or, to put it in an ethical context, "good reasons") in a particular rhetorical situation. To me, this is what critical thinking boils down to: evaluating evidence in a particular context. The best way I have found to teach this is to choose a particular theme for the course and have students read a variety of texts related to the theme: narratives, arguments, and expository pieces. In each case, students will respond to these pieces with respect to how well the evidence fits the rhetorical situation. In class, students usually share their observations in small-group discussions and then present their findings to the class. In such a way, students begin to understand what counts as "good reasons"; ideally, by the end of the semester, they will be able to choose evidence carefully and present it effectively in their own writing.
As far as assessment, I have been evaluating individual assignments. I have been shifting away from focusing on surface errors and moving toward holistic grading based on rhetorical effectiveness. In some assignments, I may focus on specific aspects of the rhetorical situation: audience awareness, writer's voice, evidence, etc. I like the idea of moving to a portfolio assignment, which would represent the culmination of the student's understanding of the rhetorical situation. By choosing appropriate evidence (specific assignments), students would demonstrate to the audience (me) that the purpose of the class (understanding the rhetorical situation) had been achieved.
Beyond the composition classroom, transfer of knowledge is a big concern. The goal is for students to be able to transfer the rhetorical skills learned to other classes and to life experiences. Personally, I find it somewhat mysterious that some students seem to "get it" and others don't. That is, some students seem to be able to take what is learned in one situation and, recognizing the similarities and differences, apply it to a novel situation. I think part of this ability comes with life experience. But part of it comes with explicit practice in recognizing patterns and responding appropriately. I think Smit's advice of choosing a specific context that students can relate to and care about, and having them write to achieve specific purposes within that context, is likely to result in accelerated pattern recognition ability and better transfer of rhetorical skills.
5 comments:
I'd say that most students come to intro comp with a reasonable understanding of grammar and knowledge of basic tools. But, there is a percentage which does not, which means we must prepare for them. And, what is reasonable to you in terms of grammar knowledge might be different for someone else. What, exactly, is reasonable?
I like your thinking about the importance of rhetoric. You have raised that a number of times. Corbett's diagram is indeed a very functional one. I often explain writing to students in terms of triangles or funnels. See http://richrice.com/handouts.
Rhetoric really plays into transfer, too. What is the purpose of everything we do in our class? Or, what is the END of composition (Smit)? Well, it's different for everyone, of course. But, rhetoric/purpose is a hueristic that helps students get to where they need to in order to understand the value of what's going on.
If you like portfolios, you might check out
http://portfolioteaching.com
and
http://portfoliokeeping.com
I love your tactic for teaching critical thinking...via themed classes, wherein students read different texts and discuss their merits as arguments. I don't teach now, but the idea of themed classes was something that had begun to form in my mind as a means of investing students in their work by putting them all in the same 'boat'. Have you found students to be more engaged ? And do you find that the relative value of different information sources becomes more clear to them when they explore them in a group setting...peer to peer...rather than simply hearing it from you, or exploring those sources solo?
Marc...being idealistic? Where are the swarms of locusts, and the seas turning to blood...? ")
I am currently in the process of teaching some students how to use Blogger -- not because Blogger is difficult, but it is new and therefore scary. So, as Rich says, it is safe to assume some familiarity, but mastery or comfort is not. And that's okay...it's what we get paid the big bucks for, right?
I used to focus on semiotics/ visual rhetoric in my FreshComp classes, but I've shifted to social justice and (discourse) communities. There is a lot more blank stares -- I mean, clean drinking water for the world is way less cool than thinking about the Transformers movie, you know? Plus, we have clean water so why do we care...? SIGH. It's a hard thing to get them to connect to these bigger issues, but we do eventually get there. Last quarter when we worked for the Homeless Coalition here in Seattle, students got to the point where they wanted to do a simulation, where we would sleep outside in a park to get a feel for what it would be like. It isn't the same, for sure, but they wanted to understand the experience in a real, tangible way. So it can happen -- with lots of luck!
I am still stuck on transfer, too, and hope we can talk about it some more soon.
Transfer is indeed important, if not critical. It's the reason they're in school, right? It's LAC (Learning Across Curriculum), and it's not wack (not WAC, get it?)
Coming from the business world, I understand that, in the office, there's no formula oftentimes. If fact, success often comes from thinking outside of the box. That's not easy to do. It's risky. It's inventive.
Hey Marc,
I see we agree on teaching rhetorical sensitivity. I find that it is really hard, though (just as it is hard to teach grammatical perfection). As much as I attempt to develop "real" writing situations and audiences, it is still hard for freshmen because they don't have the broader awareness of context to know what is appropriate or fitting in contexts they are not familiar with (like the academic context). I am interested in perhaps the concept of play in a composition classroom.See INK an online writing game from Mich State U where students play different writing roles--http://writing.msu.edu:16080/ink/ I wonder if this kind of "play" might be a better way to develop this rhetorical sensitivity than plunging students into real writing situations that might be intimidating and disorienting.
~Lennie
Post a Comment