The first selection I will address is "Writing as Making/Making as Writing" by speakers Elyse Eidman-Aadahl, Nichole Pinkard, Bud Hunt, and Andrew Sliwinsky. In a refreshing change of pace, this assignment is a recorded video chat conversation between four speakers on the importance of writing as an interdisciplinary skill, and how this skill can be introduced to people with all kinds of different interests. This talk strikes a familiar chord with our class, as it is related to the National Writing Project, an organization with which we are all familiar.
The entry point into this conversation comes from Elyse Eidman-Aadahl who speaks about the young person as the productive agent in the learning environment. Eidman-Aadahl places immense importance on this fact, and emphasizes the importance of teachers realizing this and treating students with respect to this title as agent. After all, as is noted in the video chat, writing is not just about essays and research papers, it's about making. As Eidman-Aadahl says, "Writing is craft." Writing is a tool for the creator and, whatever the project, it should be recognized as such. We have talked about this idea extensively throughout the semester- how students need to be encouraged to write in relevant ways.
Another point that Eidman-Aadahl made that I think is important to note is the role of the teacher as "maker." I think it is extremely important for a teacher to stay relevant in his or her field by contributing. In doing this, the teacher never stops learning and participating in their fields of interest, which keeps the subjects fresh for them and enables them to be inspired, which is good both for them and for their students. I remember talking about this more extensively in the second part of this class (coming for everyone else next semester), but I think it was an interesting and crucial thing to note in the context of this talk.
Crucial to this talk is the concept of the "maker space," which is a learning space established as a separate entity from schools. Most excitingly, these spaces aren't just limited to the natural writers! According to our speakers, "writers are made, not born." Additionally, they aren't all English majors. Contributor Bud Hunt comes from a STEM perspective and made a case for such spaces as "promoting habits across domains." Nichole Pinkard, a computer programmer, speaks to the importance of maker spaces as places which cultivate the "integration of literacies." Gone are the days in which students could limit writing to the English classroom, and thank goodness for that!
I appreciate the idea that anyone can be a writer. For some reason, it seems that people have the concept that writers are born with the talent to write, but Eidman-Aadahl points out that in other fields (engineering, computer programming, etc.), it is understood that knowledge is gained through hard work. This is also true for writing! I do believe strongly that people are born with certain talents and propensities, but I think that much can be learned through training and perseverance.
Writing should not be work, it should not be an obligation. The best thing that could happen to the perception of writing would be for it to be seen as a joy, and an outlet. Andrew Sliwinski sites a quote from William Morris: "Art is man's joy and labor." He does this for the purpose of pointing out that labor is necessary but, when joy is involved, the product comes naturally. It's not about training, necessarily, it's about love of the craft-- whether the craft is writing itself, or anything else you could be interested in and want to share with the world.
The biggest thing I got from this talk is that writing is inter-disciplinary, open to students of all walks of life. As I noted above, each of the speakers in this talk had something different to offer, and each came from a different world. It's for reasons like this that students can no longer have an excuse to not care about writing, because it is completely relevant to all fields and interests, and can find a home in any kind of passion. The concept of maker spaces is fantastic to me, because it separates writing from school assignments. I was particularly struck by the concept of maker spaces as having "low floors and high ceilings," which is an incredibly inclusive and inspiration concept. It's also refreshing to have hope that writing will evolve with the times and remain an important part of scholarship, whether it is writing in the traditional research paper sense, or writing to convey interest and excitement in Minecraft.
I enjoyed this video because it felt like a fresh take on the topics we have discussed in class. Because it's not another paper, it felt more interactive and engaging, and overall I enjoyed the discussion.
In a stark contrast to the first selection, the other assigned selection is "Writing Assessment in the Early Twenty-First Century" by author Katheen Blake Yancey. Whereas the first conversation focused on the importance of maker spaces and interactive and practical applications of writing, Yancey brings the focus back to writing assessment in the contemporary classroom. As much as it hurts to think about, tests like the SAT still exist to assess student's knowledge, and it's still the teacher's primary job to prepare them for these examinations. Traditional classroom writing instruction isn't going anywhere so the discussion becomes, "how can we best introduce this to students in a way that they will understand?"
In this piece, Yancey dissects the current movement in writing assessment, which she defines as "complicated, dynamic, and...in flux" (172), which certainly does seem to be the case. Writing instruction has evolved to include themes that have become prevalent in writing in recent years, including race, social status, ESL, and the digital world, among others. In a way that faintly echoes the sentiments of the speakers in the first selection, Yancey makes note of the fact that the environment surrounding writing is changing and there are far more variables surrounding the field that must be taken into account.
A particular approach which has been implemented over the years is the portfolio approach, which requires the student to compile a portfolio of drafts throughout the semester, culminating in a final work. The goal of this approach is the ability to trace progress throughout the writing process. In regard to the conversation surrounding portfolio grading (granting the fact that I am not a teacher), the portfolio seems to be an effective way of observing student, as long as it is observed by the teacher throughout the semester. If the portfolio were to be collected at the end of the semester with no prior review, I fail to see how this would help the student. If the portfolio were to be compiled throughout the semester with periodic reviews and conversations regarding process, I feel that this approach could be quite effective. However, the unfortunate truth is that this might prove to be idealistic, considering that teachers have limited time.
This piece is a far more technical essay than the first selection, which made it challenging to follow, but I'm looking forward to seeing what my classmates were able to draw from the conversation. Personally, I was engaged by her discussion of portfolio grading, so I would especially like to hear from the teachers in class as to if they think this is an effective solution.
Sunday, December 4, 2016
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Formula and Tradition--Blog #9
I didn't know what to expect at the start of this Why the "Research Paper" Isn't Working (2011), considering how strongly I feel about the importance of research papers, but I found myself nodding in understanding with much of what author Barbara Fister had to say on the topic. A lot of the research paper process can translate as pointless and confusing rules, and much of this pointless confusion begins and ends with citations. At the start of her article, Fister links to a blog post that she wrote in 2009, called Manual Labor, in which she mourns the stupidity of the updated MLA and APA guidelines. One part of this article that particularly stood out to me was the following paragraph:
Going back to the assigned article, Fister makes another compelling point in saying:
Now, for my opinion. I think this is an interesting theory, and I think it could work for some students, particularly those who aren't going to care that much about style in the first place. Ultimately however, I feel the same way about this as I do about the importance of learning grammar in the classroom-- it's important. As an English major, I've had that one professor and by God, I'm grateful for her because, despite the hell she put me through, I learned how to format a paper. She taught me awareness, and she taught me that there are certain ways to do things. I don't think style should be judged over content, but it is important, and there is something to be said for tradition. The students who are going to care about strict attention to style will learn how to work with it, and those who need just survive the class will experience the true way of formatting a traditional paper.
Admittedly, this is a tricky situation because, like much of what we have discussed thus far, there isn't one correct answer. For all the complaints against citations and the rigid rules surrounding them, there is something to be said for the discipline of learning these methods. It is entirely possible to turn the rules into guidelines, and write an incredible paper with and despite them. However, writing is not a one-size-fits-all process, and different approaches work for different people. I personally think there is real merit to be found in the citation styles, because I do find purpose in setting parameters.
Next up, we have a slightly older article, from 2000, The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (And Why We Need to Resist) by Mark Wiley. This article immediately seems to tie in well to the first selection, after all, what's more formulaic that citation styles?
Wiley immediately states his opinion that "formulaic writing is the actual villain in this classroom drama....it is the pedagogical blindness that formulaic writing leads to that disturbs me and that seems to be the real culprit" (61). He goes on to introduce Schaffer's approach to writing, a highly formulaic approach which feels quite familiar to me, as resembling the formula I leaned as a young student.
Wiley fairly highlights the strengths of Schaffer's approach as unifying students by having all focus on the same concepts-- repetitively and consistently, creating a unified front through all classrooms. This approach focuses on the importance of fact over opinion-- a key separation that will be crucial for students to understand throughout their academic lives. Schaffer's approach teaches that claims must be made and substantiated in very specific and clear-cut ways. At bare minimum, this formulaic method gives all students a rudimentary understanding of how to write an essay.
On the flip side, some find Schaffer's approach to be too bare-bones and stifling. Wiley cites one teacher as saying that students need to learn "writing fluency.....not simply learn how to fill out a form" (63). This is a fair criticism, the bare-bones approach can appear to be very much a skeleton with not much room left for growth. The essay is also supposed to be a flexible form, and Schaffer's method certainly doesn't appear to be flexible, despite, interestingly enough, Schaffer's own proclamation that "writing is an act of discovery" (qtd. in Wiley 64).
Once again, I'm conflicted in reacting to this article. Personally, I learned to write an essay using formulaic methods, and it never stopped me. Every essay I wrote throughout elementary and middle school was in the five paragraph structure: introduction, three topic sentences, conclusion. This structure was set in stone, but it didn't keep me from growing to love writing, and this might just be a situation in which those who are going to love writing will love it regardless, and those who don't, won't. One of the problematic things that Wiley mentions is that some students might learn this structure and cling to it forever, to which I respond, it's a good thing I didn't learn addition and subtraction and refuse to move on from that point in my mathematics education.
That being said, I get it. Structure is boring, dull, and rigid, and might not work for everyone. Wiley moves toward a more conceptual understanding of Schaffer's approach later in his article, as he cites James Collins, who has suggested that Schaffer's approach not be applied mechanically, but understood as a method that can be adapted to fit particular situations. Ultimately, I think this is the best way of looking at this dilemma. Similarly to what I said above, I think that structure and formula is important in learning, and once you know the method, you can work with it. Students, especially children, need parameters, and formulaic writing instruction may be one such parameter. That all being said, I'd be interested to hearing a counter approach to the formulaic method because there's always room for new ideas that will teach and serve the students in the best ways possible.
And what exactly are the learning outcomes of creating an error-free list of references? You learn that research is a pain in the butt. You learn that it’s really, really important to follow pointless rules with utter scrupulousness. You learn that, at the end of the day, you’ll get points off because you didn’t follow the pointless rules – unless, of course, you’re making a bundle off book sales, in which case “nonsignificant” is a valid defense.Really though, if we're being honest, where is the lie? We've all had that that one professor. The type you're terrified of because s/he is the type to take away credit due to an incorrectly applied citation, or quotation style. We've all written research papers, done the research, and worried all the while that that one professor might focus too much on style over content. And most of us, as Fister points out, have thrown together the Works Cited page the night before the paper was due, with painstaking attention paid to every word for fear of being penalized for an incorrect citation style. If you stop to think about it, this does sound pretty ludicrous.
Going back to the assigned article, Fister makes another compelling point in saying:
The first year 'research paper' has always sent a mixed message. You’re supposed to be original, but must quote someone else to back up every point you make - while in constant fear that you’ll be accused of stealing from them.The obscure rules of citing sources only exacerbates the confusion and focuses attention on mechanics.Fister suggests that students writing outside of the research paper structure have plenty to say because they aren't limited and find more personal satisfaction outside of the traditional conventions. She proposes that students learn enough to know the importance of finding sources and valid information, but suggests that the traditional research paper isn't the right way to go about presenting this information. She suggests, "If you want students to learn about a topic and be able to synthesize information effectively, fine – but don’t call it research. Turn it into a presentation, an informational brochure, or a Wikipedia article." She then notes an interesting counter to the traditional research paper, an idea presented by Nick Carbone, that students "first learn to write using sources the way people outside academia do—drawing them into the text as journalists and essayists do. The fussiness of citation rules can be left until students are writing something truly academic, in their junior or senior year."
Now, for my opinion. I think this is an interesting theory, and I think it could work for some students, particularly those who aren't going to care that much about style in the first place. Ultimately however, I feel the same way about this as I do about the importance of learning grammar in the classroom-- it's important. As an English major, I've had that one professor and by God, I'm grateful for her because, despite the hell she put me through, I learned how to format a paper. She taught me awareness, and she taught me that there are certain ways to do things. I don't think style should be judged over content, but it is important, and there is something to be said for tradition. The students who are going to care about strict attention to style will learn how to work with it, and those who need just survive the class will experience the true way of formatting a traditional paper.
Admittedly, this is a tricky situation because, like much of what we have discussed thus far, there isn't one correct answer. For all the complaints against citations and the rigid rules surrounding them, there is something to be said for the discipline of learning these methods. It is entirely possible to turn the rules into guidelines, and write an incredible paper with and despite them. However, writing is not a one-size-fits-all process, and different approaches work for different people. I personally think there is real merit to be found in the citation styles, because I do find purpose in setting parameters.
Next up, we have a slightly older article, from 2000, The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (And Why We Need to Resist) by Mark Wiley. This article immediately seems to tie in well to the first selection, after all, what's more formulaic that citation styles?
Wiley immediately states his opinion that "formulaic writing is the actual villain in this classroom drama....it is the pedagogical blindness that formulaic writing leads to that disturbs me and that seems to be the real culprit" (61). He goes on to introduce Schaffer's approach to writing, a highly formulaic approach which feels quite familiar to me, as resembling the formula I leaned as a young student.
Wiley fairly highlights the strengths of Schaffer's approach as unifying students by having all focus on the same concepts-- repetitively and consistently, creating a unified front through all classrooms. This approach focuses on the importance of fact over opinion-- a key separation that will be crucial for students to understand throughout their academic lives. Schaffer's approach teaches that claims must be made and substantiated in very specific and clear-cut ways. At bare minimum, this formulaic method gives all students a rudimentary understanding of how to write an essay.
On the flip side, some find Schaffer's approach to be too bare-bones and stifling. Wiley cites one teacher as saying that students need to learn "writing fluency.....not simply learn how to fill out a form" (63). This is a fair criticism, the bare-bones approach can appear to be very much a skeleton with not much room left for growth. The essay is also supposed to be a flexible form, and Schaffer's method certainly doesn't appear to be flexible, despite, interestingly enough, Schaffer's own proclamation that "writing is an act of discovery" (qtd. in Wiley 64).
Once again, I'm conflicted in reacting to this article. Personally, I learned to write an essay using formulaic methods, and it never stopped me. Every essay I wrote throughout elementary and middle school was in the five paragraph structure: introduction, three topic sentences, conclusion. This structure was set in stone, but it didn't keep me from growing to love writing, and this might just be a situation in which those who are going to love writing will love it regardless, and those who don't, won't. One of the problematic things that Wiley mentions is that some students might learn this structure and cling to it forever, to which I respond, it's a good thing I didn't learn addition and subtraction and refuse to move on from that point in my mathematics education.
That being said, I get it. Structure is boring, dull, and rigid, and might not work for everyone. Wiley moves toward a more conceptual understanding of Schaffer's approach later in his article, as he cites James Collins, who has suggested that Schaffer's approach not be applied mechanically, but understood as a method that can be adapted to fit particular situations. Ultimately, I think this is the best way of looking at this dilemma. Similarly to what I said above, I think that structure and formula is important in learning, and once you know the method, you can work with it. Students, especially children, need parameters, and formulaic writing instruction may be one such parameter. That all being said, I'd be interested to hearing a counter approach to the formulaic method because there's always room for new ideas that will teach and serve the students in the best ways possible.
Tools to Inspire (Student) Writers
#WhyIWrite - An Introduction
"Moses said to the Lord, ‘Pardon your servant, Lord. I have never been eloquent, neither in the past nor since you have spoken to your servant. I am slow of speech and tongue.’ The Lord said to him, ‘Who gave human beings their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I, the Lord? Now go; I will help you speak and will teach you what to say.’” Exodus 4:10-12
I write because, from a young age, writing is how I am best able to express my feelings and communicate with others. I have always struggled to have the confidence to speak in front of people, a limitation I am slowly fighting to overcome, but I have always been able to communicate through writing. I believe God gives us gifts, and I feel that writing is the gift that has been given to me. I write to communicate, and believe that words are power. Because the ability to write has helped me so much in my life, I want to share this gift with other students.
My #WhyIWrite project is a list of strategies and ideas for teachers looking for new ways to help and inspire their students-- those who love writing, and those who do not. Although this list is directed at teachers looking to inspire their students, I believe that writers of all ages and stages will find it to be a wonderful compilation of resources. Let's begin!
Strategy #1: Grammar Review
Teachers can take for granted that all students are on the same level of understanding grammar and basic writing skills when, in reality, this may be far from the truth. In a college classroom, the students are coming from various backgrounds, and the best place to begin is with basic grammar. Here is a review of basic grammar from Cayuga Community College, prepared by Professor James Delaney.
Another fantastic tool for anyone interested in refreshing their knowledge of grammar is The Gremlins of Grammar by Toni Boyle and K.D. Sullivan. This book is both engaging and educational, and deserves a spot on every bookshelf in the world. It is particularly excellent for students who need to refresh their grammar, but find traditional instructional methods to be incomprehensible and dry (sorry, Strunk and White).
By starting on the ground floor, each student should feel that they are prepared to tackle what comes next-- the actual writing. At best, the students who are unfamiliar with basic grammatical rules will have the opportunity to learn. At worst, the students who already have an understanding of English grammar will be able to refresh their knowledge.
If you or your students are interested in the “why” beyond some grammar rules, than Mignon Fogarty, a.k.a. Grammar Girl, is the girl for you. Her blogs and podcasts cover topics such as the difference between affect and effect, used to vs. use to, and who vs. whom. Whether you’re writing a paper, or are just curious about the intricacies of the English language, Mignon probably has the answer.
Strategy #2: Structure Review
Much like grammar, we often are quick to assume that students are all on the same page in knowing how an essay (of any kind) is structured. While I had the five paragraph essay format hammered into my head at a young age, I cannot assume that each of my readers (or students) have had the same experience.
The following link includes a wealth of guiding information from Dr. Randy Rambo, of Illinois Valley Community College, regarding the basic steps of composing an essay. It also helpfully includes samples.
In addition to essay writing guidelines, Rambo also provides a detailed explanation of punctuation and grammar, stylistic matters, writing with sources, and more.
Strategy #3: Writing is Crucial to All Majors
“I’m not an English major, I’m an [insert major here]. I don’t need to know how to write well.” This ever-popular straw man argument against writing classes is often heard uttered from the lips of students disinterested in writing, but forced into it by course requirements. In reality, the ability to write and communicate well is as crucial for every major as the ability to do basic addition and subtraction. As true as it is that writing is crucial to students of all disciplines, this truth is not necessarily going to be embraced by every computer science or engineering major who could easily question when they’ll need writing skills in their respective fields.
For some people, examples are key. Below I have listed three articles from the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and Forbes, all dates from within the past five years, stating the importance of writing skills in the workplace.
Strategy #4: Make it Fun!
As someone who has been immersed in grammatical studies all my life, it is easy for me to slash at a paper full of egregious grammatical or spelling errors. While the correction of such things does certainly have its place, it is important to remember that such things can be disheartening to students. It can be easy to forget that to many students, the intricacies of grammar only matter in dusty, old textbooks and bear no relevance to reality. In this case, a relevant example can make all of the difference in the world-- after all, don’t discount the importance of fun! Before jumping into the serious stuff, an intro like the following can be a great way to get students’ toes wet. These lessons examine such things as metaphor, visual representation, and speaker/audience relationships, all of which are important to understand in the student’s own writing.
For the sake of holding students’ attention, I would recommend a quiz or worksheet in addition to this video, but I recommend it as an entertaining, relevant way to introduce the importance of analysis.
Strategy #5: The Internet is Your Friend
“Teacher knows best.” Although the traditional classroom approach may have once supported this impression, we now have tools that can eliminate this antiquated philosophy entirely. The internet provides a wealth of information, and much of it is completely free! In addition to free-of-charge information, writing inspiration and tools for writers are also widely available.
One quick Pinterest search led me to this list of fantastic resources for writers along each step of the writing journey. One in particular that stood out to me was Stellar, which allows users to tell their story with pictures and videos, alongside text. Some students are more visual than others, and this is a cool way to incite their interest. Although it would not work for every paper expected in a freshman comp class (i.e. research papers), it could be an exciting thing to incorporate in a short story or memoir. Students need to see that writing while crucially practical, is not limited to professional settings.
Strategy #6: Inspiration
The best way to learn is by doing, and the best way to learn writing is to write. However, how do you know what to write about? One-size-fits-all prompts aren’t meant for everyone, and might give students the ability to say, “I didn’t know how to respond.” In this day and age, that’s no longer than excuse, evidenced by the existence of sites such as Writing Exercises, and their Random Subject Generator. In addition to the subject generator, the site has functions such as Random First Line prompts, Random Plot Generator (if you were looking for a story idea), and Random Scenario. No more excuses!
Another way to inspire students is to encourage them to use their own platforms to find writing inspiration. Sites like Pinterest, Tumblr, Twitter, and Facebook are filled with groups and accounts dedicated to inspirational quotes to respond to, and writing prompts-- they’re only one quick search away.
Conclusion
Considering the amount of inspiration and helpful resources that the internet has to offer, there is no longer any reason for writing to be considered boring or irrelevant. This article covers a lot of resources, and this is only a small fraction that the internet has to offer. I have learned so much through my findings, and I hope you have as well. It is my most sincere hope that you use these resources for yourself and your students, and find success in encouraging young minds to write.
Sunday, November 20, 2016
#WhyIWrite Project Memo- Blog #8
I am incredibly excited about my #WhyIWrite draft. At first, I was unsure if my list of resources would come together in the way I intended, but I am happy with my progress. My biggest concern was that I would be unable to find potential solutions to issues in the field of writing studies, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that I was concerned in vain. Writing means the world to me, and I think it's important to make it accessible to all kinds of students, especially those who might struggle and want to give up. I believe there is always a way to inspire.
I still have some work to do, but I am happy with my progress thus far. I'm hoping to have a final list of ten solutions, but as for now I am proud of the solid six I've compiled. I am looking forward to the peer-review session on Monday because I want to ensure that my list reflects back on the theme of our project (#WhyIWrite), and that the format is the best that it could be--or if there's anything I can do to make it more interesting.
Questions:
1. Does this effectively connect with the overarching #WhyIWrite theme?
2. Is there any way I can make this more interesting/engaging to students?
3. Is Google docs the most effective way of presenting this information?
4. As teachers, do you have ideas for more "solutions"? Is there anything you think I should look into that would help students be more interested in writing?
Sunday, November 13, 2016
Looking Back and Looking Forward-- Blog #7
"Looking Back as We Look Forward: Historicizing Writing Assessment" by Kathleen Yancey
It's always interesting to consider how things change as years go by, and writing assessment is no exception to this. Upon delving into this essay, I found myself immediately stopping to consider that, as we have discussed before, writing assessment and composition studies have only really been analyzed since the 1950s. When we discuss waves and trends therefore, they are only dating back ~66 years, which is a chunk of time, but certainly not very much relatively. This is a bit of a tangent, but it makes me wonder what writing instruction in schools was like earlier in history.
It's always interesting to consider how things change as years go by, and writing assessment is no exception to this. Upon delving into this essay, I found myself immediately stopping to consider that, as we have discussed before, writing assessment and composition studies have only really been analyzed since the 1950s. When we discuss waves and trends therefore, they are only dating back ~66 years, which is a chunk of time, but certainly not very much relatively. This is a bit of a tangent, but it makes me wonder what writing instruction in schools was like earlier in history.
Going back to the essay, Yancey writes about the three waves of writing assessment: objective tests (1950s-70s), the hollistically scored essay (1970-86), and portfolio/programmatic assessment (2986-present). These three approaches are exactly as different as they appear, but they share the commonality that all are grounded in method.
I think there is a good deal of merit in suggesting that other approaches to writing assessment are equally as valid, because the three waves mentioned in Yancey's piece give a great deal of power to the teacher as the final judge over a student's writing and, as we have discussed in other classes, this often does not yield the best outcome. For this reason, I appreciate the future issues that Yancey points to, first, the role of students' "self" in their writing, second, how assessment can be used to help students and third, what the teacher can learn from the assessment. I appreciate the focus on these issues because I think they offer much more to everyone involved in the writing process. They are less objective goals and leave room for subjective findings.
From what I gathered through this essay, the three waves had their purposes in student writing. Objective tests and portfolio assessment did work in some contexts and for some students, but a big part of teaching is adjusting to changing times and changing needs. In the 50s, for example, Yancey notes that the use of tests served to determine what the students needed to know and where they should be placed. A solid example of this would be Paul Diederich's explanation of "The best test to use at the college entrance level..." (7). He offers a fair, objective presentation about how students results should correspond to one another, but fails to take into consideration all of the variables that can change. As Yancey notes, Diederich's placement exercise is "an exercise in numbers, not words" (7).
As time went on, modes of assessment shifted and the question of validity came into the picture. Instead of looking at objective test scores, new forms of assessment examined the essay test and measured it up against certain standards of reliability. Instead of comparing numerial scores, this movement emphasized the comparison of works. This form of assessment was a huge step forward because it helped to bring composition into the real world, rather than in the classroom, relegated to a numerial scale.
The third wave contained elements of both the first and the second and, to this day, is still practiced in classrooms. What stood out most about this wave was that, unlike in the second wave where teachers read and graded work, teachers are now encouraged to conference and come to "an agreeable compromise...[coming to] communal agreement" (Elbow, qtd. in Yancey 11).
Reading through this essay, what is most interesting to me is, as we have discussed, the huge amount of variation in methods and corresponding effectiveness. Portfolios are discussed as being ways to grade samples of students' work, but some consider them "messy" and too varied between students. Personally, I would think that the portfolio would be a highly effective way of evaluation, but not everyone would agree. The constand redefinition of standards is helpful, but also brings to light the fact that there is no perfect way to teach, or assess. The methods that work for some students will not work for others, and therefore the classroom tends to turn into a utilitarian movement of doing the most good for the most students.
The third wave contained elements of both the first and the second and, to this day, is still practiced in classrooms. What stood out most about this wave was that, unlike in the second wave where teachers read and graded work, teachers are now encouraged to conference and come to "an agreeable compromise...[coming to] communal agreement" (Elbow, qtd. in Yancey 11).
Reading through this essay, what is most interesting to me is, as we have discussed, the huge amount of variation in methods and corresponding effectiveness. Portfolios are discussed as being ways to grade samples of students' work, but some consider them "messy" and too varied between students. Personally, I would think that the portfolio would be a highly effective way of evaluation, but not everyone would agree. The constand redefinition of standards is helpful, but also brings to light the fact that there is no perfect way to teach, or assess. The methods that work for some students will not work for others, and therefore the classroom tends to turn into a utilitarian movement of doing the most good for the most students.
However, my biggest draw from this article is that by taking into consideration the methods of the past and the corresponding results, we are able to attempt to teach and help others in the best way that we possible can. By taking into consideration both the three waves of the past, as well as future considerations (i.e. self in writing, etc...) we are able to shape a classroom that choose an approach while keeping in mind that learning is not, and will never be, one-size-fits-all.
"Bi, Butch, and Bar Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender, and Sexuality" by Michelle Gibson, Matha Marinara, and Deborah Meem
In the last article by Kathleen Yancey, we were asked to look back at the history of writing assessment. This article presents a compelling juxtaposition, because it discusses a topic that is very much at the forefront of our day and age: identity. This pressing concern, relevant to many in our day and age, is bound to reflect on the experience of writing and expression, and Gibson, Marinara, and Meem present a fantastic discussion of what it has meant to them in their respective experinces.
Much of what we depend on in writing relies on structure, context, and social identity, and sometimes these things are not as black and white as they might initially seem. This is especially true for those among us who have built their lives around "building, manipulating, and rebuilding the cultural context(s) in whhich they form their social identities" (4). Writing, true writing, is about finding yourself, finding your voice and who you are, both as a writer and as a person. The authors explain that this can be hard when a person is attempting to do this in the midst of a culture full of binaries. How can you find "the real me" when you are struggling to define "the real me"?
I find this discussion fancinating because I, personally, am not familiar with the struggles that these groups face, and I think it is crucial to understand a situation from all angles. How can a teacher effectively teach a group of students if he or she is not aware of the struggles they might be facing? Writing is a process that, when done well, can strip you bare. It is the one of the most revealing things in the world. How can I stand in front of a student and tell them to write about "the real them," when they're struggling to figure out who that person is?
A topic such as sexuality can through a huge wrench into how a writer writes, or how people relate to him or her. I think this could be because the world is still getting used to such topics begin discussed, after so many years in the shadows. Things that are close to our hearts and define us are bound to shape our experiences in the world, how we see others and how others see us. Whereas some are influenced by race, some by faith, and some by class, others still are shaped by sexuality and, within this categorization, some fall in the LGBTQ+ spectrum.
I believe it is a huge challenge to bring many identities into the traditional classroom because, if there's one stereotype about academia, it's that the structures are the structures. It's okay to write controversial things...if they service those who need to be serviced. Michelle Gibson's contribution to the essay certainly pointed to that truth-- as she explained that the higher-ups did not approve of the way in which she related to her students. The writers of this piece have stood against the traditional ways, and expressed their experiences in ways that have helped their students, and provided a degree of understanding that one outside of the community might not otherwise understand.
---
To conclude my blog, I am including the link to the Google Doc which contains the first draft of my #WhyIWrite project. I have begun the document with a brief introduction of why I write, and then I move into my list of tools and inspiration for college students in a college composition class. I have tried to approach this project from the perspective of a teacher facing a mixed group of students, some who love writing, but also those who do not. The internet has so many amazing tools to offer, and every time I found one new resource, a new batch would pop up! Right now I have about 5 tools, but I plan on at least doubling this amount for the final project. Additionally, my plan is to link each tool that I list to one (or more) of the articles we have read in class, to illustrate how the tool helps to solve the problem discussed in the article. At this point I know that each tool corresponds to an article, but I need to go through and find the specific articles. I feel that I am in a good place with this project thus far, and I'm quite excited to continue on. I hope I get to implement some of these strategies myself, one day!
#WhyIWrite Project
"Bi, Butch, and Bar Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender, and Sexuality" by Michelle Gibson, Matha Marinara, and Deborah Meem
In the last article by Kathleen Yancey, we were asked to look back at the history of writing assessment. This article presents a compelling juxtaposition, because it discusses a topic that is very much at the forefront of our day and age: identity. This pressing concern, relevant to many in our day and age, is bound to reflect on the experience of writing and expression, and Gibson, Marinara, and Meem present a fantastic discussion of what it has meant to them in their respective experinces.
Much of what we depend on in writing relies on structure, context, and social identity, and sometimes these things are not as black and white as they might initially seem. This is especially true for those among us who have built their lives around "building, manipulating, and rebuilding the cultural context(s) in whhich they form their social identities" (4). Writing, true writing, is about finding yourself, finding your voice and who you are, both as a writer and as a person. The authors explain that this can be hard when a person is attempting to do this in the midst of a culture full of binaries. How can you find "the real me" when you are struggling to define "the real me"?
I find this discussion fancinating because I, personally, am not familiar with the struggles that these groups face, and I think it is crucial to understand a situation from all angles. How can a teacher effectively teach a group of students if he or she is not aware of the struggles they might be facing? Writing is a process that, when done well, can strip you bare. It is the one of the most revealing things in the world. How can I stand in front of a student and tell them to write about "the real them," when they're struggling to figure out who that person is?
A topic such as sexuality can through a huge wrench into how a writer writes, or how people relate to him or her. I think this could be because the world is still getting used to such topics begin discussed, after so many years in the shadows. Things that are close to our hearts and define us are bound to shape our experiences in the world, how we see others and how others see us. Whereas some are influenced by race, some by faith, and some by class, others still are shaped by sexuality and, within this categorization, some fall in the LGBTQ+ spectrum.
I believe it is a huge challenge to bring many identities into the traditional classroom because, if there's one stereotype about academia, it's that the structures are the structures. It's okay to write controversial things...if they service those who need to be serviced. Michelle Gibson's contribution to the essay certainly pointed to that truth-- as she explained that the higher-ups did not approve of the way in which she related to her students. The writers of this piece have stood against the traditional ways, and expressed their experiences in ways that have helped their students, and provided a degree of understanding that one outside of the community might not otherwise understand.
---
To conclude my blog, I am including the link to the Google Doc which contains the first draft of my #WhyIWrite project. I have begun the document with a brief introduction of why I write, and then I move into my list of tools and inspiration for college students in a college composition class. I have tried to approach this project from the perspective of a teacher facing a mixed group of students, some who love writing, but also those who do not. The internet has so many amazing tools to offer, and every time I found one new resource, a new batch would pop up! Right now I have about 5 tools, but I plan on at least doubling this amount for the final project. Additionally, my plan is to link each tool that I list to one (or more) of the articles we have read in class, to illustrate how the tool helps to solve the problem discussed in the article. At this point I know that each tool corresponds to an article, but I need to go through and find the specific articles. I feel that I am in a good place with this project thus far, and I'm quite excited to continue on. I hope I get to implement some of these strategies myself, one day!
#WhyIWrite Project
Monday, November 7, 2016
New Applications of Composition Studies-- Blog #6
A great deal of American everyday life is based, as least in part, on the knowledge that our country has long been known as "The Melting Pot." This nickname exists because of all the cultures that have shaped (and are still shaping) America, a country inclusive of people of all colors, creeds, languages, and cultures. However, the Melting Pot can run into issues when all of these different cultures come together and struggle to communicate, due to the differences in language. For this reason, a key issue in the field of Composition Studies is the issue of teaching writing to people who speak languages other than English.
To address the point that learning a new language takes a lot of time, this is true, and a potential way to solve this issue is through providing ESL writing classes in schools, when children are at their most teachable. However, Matsuda also makes note that ESL has not been widely embraced by people who work in writing centers and, by lacking this ability, they are not serving the community in the best way possible. In failing to serve, school communities are losing valuable assets, according to Matsuda, because "second language learners may have expanded their intellectual capacity as a result of the constant demand of working with a broader range of linguistic and discursive resources" (5). In this day and age, ESL is no longer just a job for specialists, and teachers should be aware of how to help students who might have talent, but are limited because of language. Matsuda tosses around a few different ideas for the best ways of integrating non-native English speakers into the world of English composition, and I look forward to discussing this further in class. Composition Studies is certainly a field that should be internationally shared and recognized, because writing is important for everyone, regardless of language and if we need to do this by going out and learning about different cultures, then I say we go right ahead!
-
The second article we will be looking at in this class is "Blogs, Wikis, Podcasts," by Will Richardson and this title reminds me very much of the discussions we had in New Media Studies regarding writing in the digital age. It is very obvious that our interests have shifted, and people share their news and opinions in public forums such as Twitter, Facebook, and Tumblr. Although these sites tend to be more personal hosts for individuals, outlets such as blogs, wikis, and podcasts offer a new way of listening to and retaining information. The digital age offers more reach than has ever been seen before, especially in the recent past when stories and videos have become viral and spread all over the internet.
It blows my mind that, according to Richardson, as of 2006, there was almost 26 million blogs. That was ten years ago! If this was the case ten years ago, I can't even begin to comprehend the numbers now. Access to the web has changed what it means to be both a reader and a writer, and one field that Richardson notes in particular is the field of journalism. The internet has provided a huge reach for people, and news can be shared and seen faster than the speed of light. If you need information to be communicated, you no longer have to wait for television or the next day's paper, all you need to do is post online. The internet has also put power in the hands on individuals who might not have it otherwise. For better or worse, anyone can be a reporter nowadays and, while this can be risky in terms of quality control, I think it's amazing that the average person has this option.
One of the biggest issues of the digital age, however, is how it will impact the student/teacher dynamic. After all, the student is the "digital native." How is a teacher who did not grow up with the internet supposed to establish control over a student who has known how to navigate the web, almost like a second language?
We discussed this extensively in New Media Studies, but the topic never grows old because there are so many different ways of approaching the issue, and Richardson suggests that, even given the hardships, technology can be a major tool in the hands of the teacher. Yes, there are issues, most notably, safety, but the internet is too important of a development to be avoided. If students can be taught to navigate safely, there is no reason for them not to make use of this incredible resource.
The topic of safety brings to mind a past issue that was found with the sharing of information publicly. The Greek philosopher Socrates did not like the idea of writing down and preserving information, I believe, because he felt that the power was in memory, and that recording information would make people lazy. In Phaedrus, written about 370 B.C. he said
"He who thinks, then, that he has left behind him any art in writing, and he who receives it in the belief that anything in writing will be clear and certain, would be an utterly simple person, and in truth ignorant of the prophecy of Ammon, if he thinks written words are of any use except to remind him who knows the matter about which they are written."He goes on, but I think you get the point. I bring this up for the purpose of mentioning that people, no matter how intelligent, are always resistant to change and new technologies. The internet is far too big an asset to be discarded in favor of avoidable risks. The online world, as Richardson notes, has opened us up to so many opportunities, such as shared/collaborative knowledge, open access to any topic, fewer limitations than pen and paper, and the concept of knowledge as a process. It's going to take time to master, but I think it's certainly worth the risks.
Monday, October 24, 2016
The Voice Controversy -- Blog Post #5
It's interesting to me how, no matter which classes I take in a semester, topics tend to tie together in unexpected ways. For example, I'm working on a presentation on Voice in Creative Writing, and the first article we are reading this week is "Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries" by Peter Elbow.
Personally, I appreciate a strong sense of natural, authorial voice in writing. For example, if I were to be given a passage by David Sedaris, without knowing that he wrote it, I'd probably be able to guess, because Sedaris has a distinct voice. It is my opinion that this kind of voice gives flavor to an author's work. However, I had never considered the negative reactions to voice-- "it's misleading," "sincerity is not a useful goal for writing" (1)-- nor had I considered that the voice debate goes as far back in history as Plato and Aristotle. Recently, the discussion has quieted down quite a bit, which is also interesting. Have we tired of the debate? Elbow certainly doesn't want this to happen.
In terms of recent discussions regarding voice, Elbow examines Theodore Baird's approach in his classroom in the mid 1900s, which had a significant impact on many who came into contact with it-- including many great thinkers in the field. Baird's approach focused on the importance of voice, however did not see it as reflective of the author behind the pen. They define "self" in writing as being "continually made and re-made by language" (3). Personally, I'm not a huge fan of this approach because it reminds me very much of New Criticism which I have very mixed feelings about, because I don't think it gives enough credence to the presence and experience of an author entering into his or her own text.
Even though we don't acknowledge it now as much as we used to, voice is still very much alive in our modern world, perhaps even more so now than ever before. Voice has become all the more important in this new digital age, when a text message can be interpreted in many different ways. Ever heard of the many different ways to read the sentence, "I never said I stole her money"? The voice behind writing becomes all the more important as the world of "text" takes over.
I like the difference that Elbow highlights between "text" and "voice," establishing text as literal words on the page, just the words, without any external meaning attached to them-- rather like numbers in a math problem. Voice, on the other hand, is less like the mathematical equation of text, and is instead likened to the personal handwriting of each individual person-- warmer and unique. In my opinion, this is establishing voice as the soul of the piece.
It takes time for a writer to establish and become comfortable with his or her voice, in fact, it is a lifelong process. In the classroom setting, it becomes the teacher's job to gently guide students into finding their own voice in the midst of handing out assignments on strict deadlines-- much easier said than done. I agree with Elbow that an understanding of voice can come through reading and understanding that voices of authors they enjoy, and then using those examples to try to better understand their own. I know this certainly worked for me.
Interestingly, Elbow, also mentions some of the cons of voice in writing, for example, in some instances it may be best to overlook voice, in order to find meaning in a work. For example, one might not enjoy a certain writer because of the voice in his or her work, but that does not mean that he or she does not have something important to offer. A teacher might not automatically connect with a student's voice, but the student might just have an entirely different style. There are instances in which looking beyond voice, although hard, can be greatly beneficial. I enjoyed Elbow's article because I think he offered a fair perspective both for and against voice in writing. No matter which side you fall on, the discussion is far from over.
Our next article, "Responding to Student Writing" by Nancy Sommers, doesn't quite tie in with the first, but it does tie back to a topic we have discussed in extensively in class, that is, the most effctive ways of responding to student writing. Despite a teacher's best efforts, a student may simply not connect with their teaching approach because teaching is not one-size fits-all. For this reason, it is important to be prepared to have different strategies for dealing with different kinds of students.
Responding to student writing takes a long time-- Sommers estimates about 20 to 40 minutes per student, which adds up greatly considering the amount of students and periods one teacher has total. This is a lot of time to dedicate to an effort which may or may not be appreciated by the students, and it's hard to say whether or not it is. As we have discussed in previous classes, some students respond well and some don't care at all, which can be incredibly discouraging to the teacher trying his or her best.
As I read through this piece I felt a strong sense of déjà vu, and I found out why pretty early on, as Sommers cites Lil Brannon and Cyril Knoblauch as other thinkers in the field. Brannon and Knoblauch wrote the article I covered last week, "On Student's Rights to Their Own Texts," which covers similar ideas of placing emphasis on the student's work. A major conclusion that Sommers comes to is that often a teacher's comments on a paper are much like that of a computer, "arbitrary and idiosyncratic" (3) which, as has been concluded, can draw the student's attention away from their own purposes in writing. Commanding students to "expand" and to think more about certain parts of their writing may be done with good intentions, but it may also defeat the purpose of what the student is trying to convey.
I certainly think that teacher comments can be nitpicky. Sommers talks about students becoming frustrated because the comments on their papers seem like they could have been copied and pasted from one to the other, especially in cases when something like "be specific," "be precise" is said over and over. However, in some cases, comments like this are totally warranted, and I think it all depends on the relationship that is built between teacher and student which makes all the difference. If the student knows that the teacher cares and is on his or her team, they're going to be more likely to question a comment, rather than be discouraged.
In regard to our final project, I'm excited about our spin on Genius Hour and passion projects! Genius Hour was birthed by Google, one of the current most powerful companies in the world, and I think it's an incredibly empowering exercise. The original idea is that for one hour, once a week, students are allowed to take class time and work on their personal "passion projects," which they will present at the end of the year Passion projects are cool because they give students the ability to learn and work on a project that is important to them, outside of a class syllabus. I think that these passion projects will be a great way of workshopping our individual ideas, and will serve as a way for all of us to gather together and collaborate on all of our different ideas. The unifying strand that runs throughout all of our work will be the hashtag #WhyIWrite, which is a big question for anyone involved in our field.
Personally, I began writing because it gave me a voice in ways that my own voice failed me. I was a painfully shy child who struggled to speak to anyone about something as simple as the weather, let alone about serious matters. However, even though I couldn't speak up, I could write. In time, teachers noticed that I wrote well, and encouraged me to write more, and on different subjects. Through positive responses to my writing, I learned that I did have something to say and it gave me the courage to speak up. Now, I write because it allows me to think through complex ideas and outline theories, and come up with my own new concepts that I would love to introduce to the world of literature. Now, I write for the sake of research.
For my passion project, I like the idea of compiling a few lesson plans that incorporate theories and techniques we have learned about in class, in order to come up with a curriculum that might help other students to love writing. I would especially appreciate our group time for this effort, because of all the teachers in class who could advise me in the practicality of my plans. I like this idea because it could turn #WhyIWrite into #WhyWeWrite.
Personally, I appreciate a strong sense of natural, authorial voice in writing. For example, if I were to be given a passage by David Sedaris, without knowing that he wrote it, I'd probably be able to guess, because Sedaris has a distinct voice. It is my opinion that this kind of voice gives flavor to an author's work. However, I had never considered the negative reactions to voice-- "it's misleading," "sincerity is not a useful goal for writing" (1)-- nor had I considered that the voice debate goes as far back in history as Plato and Aristotle. Recently, the discussion has quieted down quite a bit, which is also interesting. Have we tired of the debate? Elbow certainly doesn't want this to happen.
In terms of recent discussions regarding voice, Elbow examines Theodore Baird's approach in his classroom in the mid 1900s, which had a significant impact on many who came into contact with it-- including many great thinkers in the field. Baird's approach focused on the importance of voice, however did not see it as reflective of the author behind the pen. They define "self" in writing as being "continually made and re-made by language" (3). Personally, I'm not a huge fan of this approach because it reminds me very much of New Criticism which I have very mixed feelings about, because I don't think it gives enough credence to the presence and experience of an author entering into his or her own text.
Even though we don't acknowledge it now as much as we used to, voice is still very much alive in our modern world, perhaps even more so now than ever before. Voice has become all the more important in this new digital age, when a text message can be interpreted in many different ways. Ever heard of the many different ways to read the sentence, "I never said I stole her money"? The voice behind writing becomes all the more important as the world of "text" takes over.
I like the difference that Elbow highlights between "text" and "voice," establishing text as literal words on the page, just the words, without any external meaning attached to them-- rather like numbers in a math problem. Voice, on the other hand, is less like the mathematical equation of text, and is instead likened to the personal handwriting of each individual person-- warmer and unique. In my opinion, this is establishing voice as the soul of the piece.
It takes time for a writer to establish and become comfortable with his or her voice, in fact, it is a lifelong process. In the classroom setting, it becomes the teacher's job to gently guide students into finding their own voice in the midst of handing out assignments on strict deadlines-- much easier said than done. I agree with Elbow that an understanding of voice can come through reading and understanding that voices of authors they enjoy, and then using those examples to try to better understand their own. I know this certainly worked for me.
Interestingly, Elbow, also mentions some of the cons of voice in writing, for example, in some instances it may be best to overlook voice, in order to find meaning in a work. For example, one might not enjoy a certain writer because of the voice in his or her work, but that does not mean that he or she does not have something important to offer. A teacher might not automatically connect with a student's voice, but the student might just have an entirely different style. There are instances in which looking beyond voice, although hard, can be greatly beneficial. I enjoyed Elbow's article because I think he offered a fair perspective both for and against voice in writing. No matter which side you fall on, the discussion is far from over.
Our next article, "Responding to Student Writing" by Nancy Sommers, doesn't quite tie in with the first, but it does tie back to a topic we have discussed in extensively in class, that is, the most effctive ways of responding to student writing. Despite a teacher's best efforts, a student may simply not connect with their teaching approach because teaching is not one-size fits-all. For this reason, it is important to be prepared to have different strategies for dealing with different kinds of students.
Responding to student writing takes a long time-- Sommers estimates about 20 to 40 minutes per student, which adds up greatly considering the amount of students and periods one teacher has total. This is a lot of time to dedicate to an effort which may or may not be appreciated by the students, and it's hard to say whether or not it is. As we have discussed in previous classes, some students respond well and some don't care at all, which can be incredibly discouraging to the teacher trying his or her best.
As I read through this piece I felt a strong sense of déjà vu, and I found out why pretty early on, as Sommers cites Lil Brannon and Cyril Knoblauch as other thinkers in the field. Brannon and Knoblauch wrote the article I covered last week, "On Student's Rights to Their Own Texts," which covers similar ideas of placing emphasis on the student's work. A major conclusion that Sommers comes to is that often a teacher's comments on a paper are much like that of a computer, "arbitrary and idiosyncratic" (3) which, as has been concluded, can draw the student's attention away from their own purposes in writing. Commanding students to "expand" and to think more about certain parts of their writing may be done with good intentions, but it may also defeat the purpose of what the student is trying to convey.
I certainly think that teacher comments can be nitpicky. Sommers talks about students becoming frustrated because the comments on their papers seem like they could have been copied and pasted from one to the other, especially in cases when something like "be specific," "be precise" is said over and over. However, in some cases, comments like this are totally warranted, and I think it all depends on the relationship that is built between teacher and student which makes all the difference. If the student knows that the teacher cares and is on his or her team, they're going to be more likely to question a comment, rather than be discouraged.
In regard to our final project, I'm excited about our spin on Genius Hour and passion projects! Genius Hour was birthed by Google, one of the current most powerful companies in the world, and I think it's an incredibly empowering exercise. The original idea is that for one hour, once a week, students are allowed to take class time and work on their personal "passion projects," which they will present at the end of the year Passion projects are cool because they give students the ability to learn and work on a project that is important to them, outside of a class syllabus. I think that these passion projects will be a great way of workshopping our individual ideas, and will serve as a way for all of us to gather together and collaborate on all of our different ideas. The unifying strand that runs throughout all of our work will be the hashtag #WhyIWrite, which is a big question for anyone involved in our field.
Personally, I began writing because it gave me a voice in ways that my own voice failed me. I was a painfully shy child who struggled to speak to anyone about something as simple as the weather, let alone about serious matters. However, even though I couldn't speak up, I could write. In time, teachers noticed that I wrote well, and encouraged me to write more, and on different subjects. Through positive responses to my writing, I learned that I did have something to say and it gave me the courage to speak up. Now, I write because it allows me to think through complex ideas and outline theories, and come up with my own new concepts that I would love to introduce to the world of literature. Now, I write for the sake of research.
For my passion project, I like the idea of compiling a few lesson plans that incorporate theories and techniques we have learned about in class, in order to come up with a curriculum that might help other students to love writing. I would especially appreciate our group time for this effort, because of all the teachers in class who could advise me in the practicality of my plans. I like this idea because it could turn #WhyIWrite into #WhyWeWrite.
Sunday, October 16, 2016
These Theories are Comp-licated -- Discussion Lead Response
“Composition at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century” by Richard Fulkerson
“On Student’s Rights to their Own Texts: A Model of Teacher Response” by Lil Brannon and C.H. Knoblauch
The most effective way to teach writing to students has been up for debate for a long time, as detailed in “Composition at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century,” by Richard Fulkerson. Fulkerson’s article is an updated look at the field of composition studies from his last assessment of the field in the early 90s. In the twenty-plus years that have passed, new fields have risen up and changed the nature of the field in important ways, but these changes require assessment. Twenty years ago, people were not as interested in cultural studies, including topics such as race, feminism, and the LGBTQ+ community. However, interest in these fields, among others, has boomed in recent years and added many new chapters to composition studies textbooks. This is most impactful in the sense that composition studies is no longer limited to the English classroom, and instead is pertinent to many other fields of study as well. For this reason, it is interesting to study what has changed in recent years in terms of teaching methods for these new groups of students. Fulkerson opens his essay by proposing four questions which dissect different methods of teaching composition axiologically, by process, pedagogically, and epistemologically.
The purpose of these questions is to examine the different approaches to teaching college writing with the inclusion of new fields of study. For example, the cultural studies field melds well with composition studies because both seek similar ends, most notably, liberation from traditional discourse. Fulkerson also discusses expressivism, a methodological way in which writing is moving away from the traditional. Expressivism gives the writer in any field a large amount of room to respond to topics they feel passionate about through freewriting and journaling, and to seeks to “‘foster [. . .] aesthetic, cognitive, and moral development,’ not to improve written communication or encourage critical thinking” (Fulkerson 667). The composition studies community appears to be torn between adopting the newer methodologies or sticking with the traditional, process-driven methodologies, and Fulkerson ultimately concludes that opinions differ, and there is no way of proving one methodology to be superior over another.
I didn’t expect these two articles to tie together but, interestingly enough, they do. In their article, “On Student’s Rights to their Own Texts: A Model of Teacher Response,” Brannon and Knoblauch present a compelling argument detailing a new way for teachers to respond to student writers, which would certainly not be considered a traditional methodology. The writers make a case for why teachers should approach students’ writing with as much respect as they would approach the thoughts of any other author. To understand this argument, the reader is asked to consider the examples of a textbook, or a newspaper article. Brannon and Knoblauch argue that, when reading these mediums, we tend to automatically assume that the writer has done his research and that he is educated on the topic he is covering. And, even if this proves to not be true, we still give the writer the benefit of the doubt and assume that the lapse in quality was a moment of weakness. However, when it comes to students, the assumption automatically tends to be that “the student [has] not yet earned the authority that ordinarily compels readers to listen seriously to what writers have to say.” (Brannon 3). Regardless of whether or not this proves to be true, the automatic assumption of students inferior intellectual status is demeaning, and may lead them to care less about their assignments, going on the assumption that their work will be grammatically picked to pieces and the reliability of it will be questioned. Brannon and Knoblauch do not set out to argue that student texts are authoritative, however they do encourage teachers to move away from their concept from the “Ideal Text.” Instead, they recommend focusing on conferencing with students and working with them to communicate their ideas in a more effective way. By doing this, the hope is that students may learn to better explain themselves and feel that their writing is being graded on quality of argument, rather than an arbitrary “Ideal” standard.
I found Fulkerson’s article to be loaded to overflowing with heavy theoretical talking points and references, and had to read through it several times to ensure that I understood what he was trying to convey. He attempted to fit many different points into one paper which got confusing and was often hard to tie the arguments back into the thesis. The paper mainly served as an analysis of the newer methodologies in comparison to already established tradition and, while excellent points were expounded on, Fulkerson ended the paper with an ambiguous summation of both: “composition studies is in for a bumpy ride” (681). So it would seem. That all being said, I did enjoy the walk-through of the history of composition studies, as well as the introduction to expressivism, and I look forward to a discussion of its merits and faults, standing against the established tradition.
On the other hand, I enjoyed Brannon and Knoblauch’s article immensely because I thought it raised very valid points regarding how teachers respond to student writing. In one of the footnotes, the writers make a comparison to reader-response criticism, a mode of literary criticism with which I am familiar. Reader-response focuses a great deal on the authority of the writer within the context of their writing, and I think this is very interesting to apply to students’ work. I thought the case example of John’s written response to the Lindbergh baby prompt was an excellent way of illustrating this point. I think that, while this article offers wonderful theoretical advice, it might be problematic in execution because teachers have such limited time with students. For this reason, I feel that the teacher taking this advice into practice might have to adapt it to fit his or her own classroom. That being said, I still feel that the awareness promoted in this essay is crucial, and could change a student’s response to a writing assignment.
Questions:
#1. Do you think that Critical/Cultural Studies(CCS) classes are effective ways of teaching writing to students? Why, or why not?
#2. Discuss the differences between the dominant tradition of composition and current cultural studies/expressivism/CCS.
#3. Do you think that Brannon and Knoblauch’s model is realistically possible to apply in a traditional classroom setting? And if not overall, how could certain elements be utilized?
Sunday, October 9, 2016
Commentary and Revision - Blog Post #3
I have always been a student who welcomes feedback from my teachers. I appreciate reading comments for two reasons: first, their presence indicated that my teachers took the time to actually read my work. Second, I can use the feedback to improve my work. In my opinion, these comments are crucial. However, I also know that, more often than not, students do not read these comments. More often than not, teachers spend their time writing comments for the student to look at the grade and throw the paper into a folder, never to be looked at again. I can imagine this has an impact on the quality of the comments that a teacher is inspired to leave but, that being said, I think commentary is too important to be taken lightly.
I find the topic of the first paper, "Writing Comments on Student Papers" by John Bean to be interesting because Bean regards commentary as a must, and broaches the topic of what qualifies as helpful, constructive commentary. Very few people are good at taking criticism, and students are among the newest, freshest writers. It is important to recognize this, and apply commentary accordingly.
Bean drops the word "puritanical" in reference to the commentary strategy that is commonly employed by teachers, which is sadly accurate. Paper revisions can turn into whirlwinds of red pen marks and comments that aren't easily understood-- as evidenced by the student responses Bean cites. I feel that the most important thing a teacher could do is to give the same kind of criticism that he or she would hope to receive on their own writing.
I completely agree with the idea of making comments on late stage rough drafts, because this is a way of ensuring that the comments are read the the suggestions are noted. As I said before, comments on a final piece are not going to be heeded by the vast majority of students. The hope is that the comments on the final piece will be read and applied to future work, but this simply does not happen in most cases.
I have mentioned more than once that I enjoy reading things that I can one day employ in my own classroom, and this paper includes a wealth of knowledge that I can certainly utilize. Moving through the article, I appreciated the suggested commentary, as well as the explanations attached. Most interesting to me was Bean's categorization of grammatical errors as "low-order concerns." He suggests that students be led to realize their own mistakes, and not necessarily have them pointed out by the teacher-- i.e., telling the student that a sentence contains a grammatical error and leaving it to them to correct. I really like this idea, mainly because I think it would force the student to learn exactly what s/he did wrong, and would be a more proactive way to learn to avoid making the same mistake in the future.
My overall reaction to this piece is positive, mainly because Bean is not the kind of teacher who lets his students get away with much, I like that! I have a lot of respect for the methods he shared in this paper, and would be excited to try them out on my own.
Moving on to the next piece, "Response to Writing" by Beach and Friedrich, I feel that these two articles were well paired. Beach and Friedrich's paper opens with a walk through the past several decades, in regard to the strategies employed in teaching writing. Right from the beginning it was evident that these writers and Bean share the opinion that comments on drafts are more effective than comments on final pieces, in regard to feedback being heeded.
Something I found interesting about this paper was the idea that effective revision and commentary will sometimes call for the teacher to take a step back and consider a different perspective. Somehow this hadn't occurred to me, but I was particularly struck by the example of the Indian born teacher's reaction to her American student's paper on receiving her driver's license. Effectively responding to content may occasionally call for the teacher stepping beyond his or her own experience in order to focus on the writing and respond accordingly.
I especially like the idea of "reader based feedback," which is explained as feedback in which the teacher responds as a typical reader would- for example, responding with surprise, anger, or confusion, in reaction to the content presented. I have experienced this, and it makes the feedback seem more human and relateable. I do not think that this indirect feedback method is always appropriate, but I think it would be helpful and refreshing if mixed in among more traditional, direct commentary.
Each student is different and commentary can never be one-size-fits-all. Some revision strategies will work for some and not for others, and it would seem that part of the art of teaching is figuring out how to help each student in the best possible way. I liked this second article because it covered a myriad of potential strategies, and acknowledged the pros and cons of each. The most important thing to gather about teacher commentary, in my opinion, is that it is both sought out by students, and crucial to their success.
I find the topic of the first paper, "Writing Comments on Student Papers" by John Bean to be interesting because Bean regards commentary as a must, and broaches the topic of what qualifies as helpful, constructive commentary. Very few people are good at taking criticism, and students are among the newest, freshest writers. It is important to recognize this, and apply commentary accordingly.
Bean drops the word "puritanical" in reference to the commentary strategy that is commonly employed by teachers, which is sadly accurate. Paper revisions can turn into whirlwinds of red pen marks and comments that aren't easily understood-- as evidenced by the student responses Bean cites. I feel that the most important thing a teacher could do is to give the same kind of criticism that he or she would hope to receive on their own writing.
I completely agree with the idea of making comments on late stage rough drafts, because this is a way of ensuring that the comments are read the the suggestions are noted. As I said before, comments on a final piece are not going to be heeded by the vast majority of students. The hope is that the comments on the final piece will be read and applied to future work, but this simply does not happen in most cases.
I have mentioned more than once that I enjoy reading things that I can one day employ in my own classroom, and this paper includes a wealth of knowledge that I can certainly utilize. Moving through the article, I appreciated the suggested commentary, as well as the explanations attached. Most interesting to me was Bean's categorization of grammatical errors as "low-order concerns." He suggests that students be led to realize their own mistakes, and not necessarily have them pointed out by the teacher-- i.e., telling the student that a sentence contains a grammatical error and leaving it to them to correct. I really like this idea, mainly because I think it would force the student to learn exactly what s/he did wrong, and would be a more proactive way to learn to avoid making the same mistake in the future.
My overall reaction to this piece is positive, mainly because Bean is not the kind of teacher who lets his students get away with much, I like that! I have a lot of respect for the methods he shared in this paper, and would be excited to try them out on my own.
Moving on to the next piece, "Response to Writing" by Beach and Friedrich, I feel that these two articles were well paired. Beach and Friedrich's paper opens with a walk through the past several decades, in regard to the strategies employed in teaching writing. Right from the beginning it was evident that these writers and Bean share the opinion that comments on drafts are more effective than comments on final pieces, in regard to feedback being heeded.
Something I found interesting about this paper was the idea that effective revision and commentary will sometimes call for the teacher to take a step back and consider a different perspective. Somehow this hadn't occurred to me, but I was particularly struck by the example of the Indian born teacher's reaction to her American student's paper on receiving her driver's license. Effectively responding to content may occasionally call for the teacher stepping beyond his or her own experience in order to focus on the writing and respond accordingly.
I especially like the idea of "reader based feedback," which is explained as feedback in which the teacher responds as a typical reader would- for example, responding with surprise, anger, or confusion, in reaction to the content presented. I have experienced this, and it makes the feedback seem more human and relateable. I do not think that this indirect feedback method is always appropriate, but I think it would be helpful and refreshing if mixed in among more traditional, direct commentary.
Each student is different and commentary can never be one-size-fits-all. Some revision strategies will work for some and not for others, and it would seem that part of the art of teaching is figuring out how to help each student in the best possible way. I liked this second article because it covered a myriad of potential strategies, and acknowledged the pros and cons of each. The most important thing to gather about teacher commentary, in my opinion, is that it is both sought out by students, and crucial to their success.
Sunday, October 2, 2016
The Importance of Being...Authentic - Blog Post #2
Everything about this week's assigned reading "Teaching Writing Authentically" by Carly D. Lidvall was thrilling to me. As I expressed in class last week, I want resources, and Lidvall has provided a gold mine of tools and resources within roughly sixty pages. The first thing that struck me as being interesting about this reading is that it is the write-up of a student's capstone experience, which made it seem much more accessible. I graduated with my bachelor's degree not too long ago, and I knew students who had to do this kind of write up to summarize their experiences student teaching, and so I was immediately interested to see the experiences that Lidvall chose to report on.
I completely agree the assertion that Lidvall makes in the first paragraph of her abstract, that "Student interest in writing begins once students see a real reason for writing" (3). Although I am not a teacher, I can easily think back to my time as a student, and I remember it being far more interesting to write when the topic was something that piqued my interest. However, I have always had the propensity to express myself through writing, and this is not the case for every student. This is all the more pertinent when a student is less prone to pick up a pen and write. I believe that a student is going to be far more interested in writing when he or she realizes that the writing experience doesn't have to be painful. Not all writing is book reports on required reading, or essay answers about the themes in books that he or she never cared about to begin with. Although there is merit in book reports and analyzing themes, truly effective writing instruction should inspire students to see the possibilities beyond school.
This brings me to my next thought, which Lidvall also addressed: relevance and real-world use. As I mentioned in class last week, I like when things can be practically applied. Although I love theory, I am happiest when I can read something, apply it in real life situations, and see results. For this reason, I appreciated Lidvall's proposal that "writing instruction in schools should closely model the writing found in real world situations. Authentic writing activities attempt to replicate the writing that students experience in the real world. I couldn't agree more.
Authenticity in writing instruction is a fascinating idea, and a way in which I would try to introduce writing to a group of students. Kids are born to ask questions and not stop asking until they receive answers, and I can only imagine the questions asked when faced with certain assignments:
"Why do I have to do this?"
"How will this ever affect my life?"
"Why do I need to know this?"
There are very real reasons to write. Every day of their adult lives, people make money by drafting proposals, editing documents, writing articles, movie scripts, books, etc. The options are endless. Although, regardless, not every student is going to be interested in writing, I agree strongly with the idea of teaching authentically. This approach may teach a kid that it is possible for him to express himself, or that a talent she has has real-life applicability.
This article provided a wealth of helpful information, strategies, and techniques to improve authentic writing instruction and create supportive environments to inspire interest in writing. Reading through, I appreciated Lidvall's note that writing instruction is not one-size-fits-all, and that writing instruction should vary: "Teaching authentically means meeting students where they are and teaching them from that place" (10). This, in my opinion, is crucial. Not every student learns in the same way, and it may take serious work from a teacher to attempt to engage different students in different ways. Writing is deeply personal, and not every kid is going to respond in the same way. Some may be more resistant.
I particularly enjoyed the section regarding "Rationale for the Curriculum," because this section struck close to home in regard to my own interests. Lidvall used the example of a student newspaper as "an authentic form of writing that enables students to write for an audience, learn a variety of formats, and write about issues that are important to them" (18). Throughout my college career I worked on the student newspaper, and this experience opened my eyes to the points of view from students of all majors and worldviews. When someone wants to say something, and they want a platform on which it will be displayed, students newspapers are valuable resources. I loved this case study, because I feel that students of all ages would be able to appreciate the newspaper platform. I personally have watched students, myself included, come alive when given the opportunity, and I found the newspaper case study to be fascinating. As Lidvall walked through each step of her thought process, objectives, goals, lesson plan, and materials, I found myself growing excited and wanting to try this out myself. Authentic writing instruction is such an exciting idea, and I feel that this example is a fantastic resource. This is an excellent example of everything I could want to gain out of this class and use for my own.
"Teacher-Writers: Then, Now, Next" by Anne Elrod Whitney, Troy Hicksm Leah Zuidema, James E. Fredricksen, and Robert P. Yagelski provided an interesting tie-in to the first article. Whereas Lidvall focused on making writing an authentic process for the student, this article gives more attention to the teacher's job as a writer, so as to keep them up to date and relatable to the students they teach.
I agree with this mindset as well. I believe that the worst thing a teacher could do is to lose touch with his or her students, and fall into the mindset that the assignments are only to be given and graded. As in any career, a great professional is the one who practices and is constantly working to improve him/herself. Whitney et. al. focused briefly on the "Then" history of teacher-writers, before moving on to the primary focus of the article, the "Now," and where teachers have found their role in recent years.
In recent years, there have been movements toward collaboration between teachers, to foster mentor environments, where teachers can connect with other teachers and receive support as researchers as well as educators. In addition to support, teachers involved in such programs find collaboration opportunities, where they can "co-create knowledge" (179). I find this idea to be interesting, because I think it could work as a way to keep educators sharp. I like the idea of teachers working together to help each other improve, because learning is an on-going experience. Just like writing authentically is important for students, it is also important for the adults who guide them. I very much liked the idea of "teacher-writers being authors in every sense: professionals who claim authority with their own words and their work" (179).
Although I originally found this article to be much drier than the first, I found it to tie in quite nicely in regard to the idea of authenticity. When I find myself in a teaching position, it is very important to me that I stay relevant, publish, and collaborate with other educators to be the best teacher that I can be, and help my students in every way possible.
I completely agree the assertion that Lidvall makes in the first paragraph of her abstract, that "Student interest in writing begins once students see a real reason for writing" (3). Although I am not a teacher, I can easily think back to my time as a student, and I remember it being far more interesting to write when the topic was something that piqued my interest. However, I have always had the propensity to express myself through writing, and this is not the case for every student. This is all the more pertinent when a student is less prone to pick up a pen and write. I believe that a student is going to be far more interested in writing when he or she realizes that the writing experience doesn't have to be painful. Not all writing is book reports on required reading, or essay answers about the themes in books that he or she never cared about to begin with. Although there is merit in book reports and analyzing themes, truly effective writing instruction should inspire students to see the possibilities beyond school.
This brings me to my next thought, which Lidvall also addressed: relevance and real-world use. As I mentioned in class last week, I like when things can be practically applied. Although I love theory, I am happiest when I can read something, apply it in real life situations, and see results. For this reason, I appreciated Lidvall's proposal that "writing instruction in schools should closely model the writing found in real world situations. Authentic writing activities attempt to replicate the writing that students experience in the real world. I couldn't agree more.
Authenticity in writing instruction is a fascinating idea, and a way in which I would try to introduce writing to a group of students. Kids are born to ask questions and not stop asking until they receive answers, and I can only imagine the questions asked when faced with certain assignments:
"Why do I have to do this?"
"How will this ever affect my life?"
"Why do I need to know this?"
There are very real reasons to write. Every day of their adult lives, people make money by drafting proposals, editing documents, writing articles, movie scripts, books, etc. The options are endless. Although, regardless, not every student is going to be interested in writing, I agree strongly with the idea of teaching authentically. This approach may teach a kid that it is possible for him to express himself, or that a talent she has has real-life applicability.
This article provided a wealth of helpful information, strategies, and techniques to improve authentic writing instruction and create supportive environments to inspire interest in writing. Reading through, I appreciated Lidvall's note that writing instruction is not one-size-fits-all, and that writing instruction should vary: "Teaching authentically means meeting students where they are and teaching them from that place" (10). This, in my opinion, is crucial. Not every student learns in the same way, and it may take serious work from a teacher to attempt to engage different students in different ways. Writing is deeply personal, and not every kid is going to respond in the same way. Some may be more resistant.
I particularly enjoyed the section regarding "Rationale for the Curriculum," because this section struck close to home in regard to my own interests. Lidvall used the example of a student newspaper as "an authentic form of writing that enables students to write for an audience, learn a variety of formats, and write about issues that are important to them" (18). Throughout my college career I worked on the student newspaper, and this experience opened my eyes to the points of view from students of all majors and worldviews. When someone wants to say something, and they want a platform on which it will be displayed, students newspapers are valuable resources. I loved this case study, because I feel that students of all ages would be able to appreciate the newspaper platform. I personally have watched students, myself included, come alive when given the opportunity, and I found the newspaper case study to be fascinating. As Lidvall walked through each step of her thought process, objectives, goals, lesson plan, and materials, I found myself growing excited and wanting to try this out myself. Authentic writing instruction is such an exciting idea, and I feel that this example is a fantastic resource. This is an excellent example of everything I could want to gain out of this class and use for my own.
"Teacher-Writers: Then, Now, Next" by Anne Elrod Whitney, Troy Hicksm Leah Zuidema, James E. Fredricksen, and Robert P. Yagelski provided an interesting tie-in to the first article. Whereas Lidvall focused on making writing an authentic process for the student, this article gives more attention to the teacher's job as a writer, so as to keep them up to date and relatable to the students they teach.
I agree with this mindset as well. I believe that the worst thing a teacher could do is to lose touch with his or her students, and fall into the mindset that the assignments are only to be given and graded. As in any career, a great professional is the one who practices and is constantly working to improve him/herself. Whitney et. al. focused briefly on the "Then" history of teacher-writers, before moving on to the primary focus of the article, the "Now," and where teachers have found their role in recent years.
In recent years, there have been movements toward collaboration between teachers, to foster mentor environments, where teachers can connect with other teachers and receive support as researchers as well as educators. In addition to support, teachers involved in such programs find collaboration opportunities, where they can "co-create knowledge" (179). I find this idea to be interesting, because I think it could work as a way to keep educators sharp. I like the idea of teachers working together to help each other improve, because learning is an on-going experience. Just like writing authentically is important for students, it is also important for the adults who guide them. I very much liked the idea of "teacher-writers being authors in every sense: professionals who claim authority with their own words and their work" (179).
Although I originally found this article to be much drier than the first, I found it to tie in quite nicely in regard to the idea of authenticity. When I find myself in a teaching position, it is very important to me that I stay relevant, publish, and collaborate with other educators to be the best teacher that I can be, and help my students in every way possible.
Sunday, September 25, 2016
Guiding and Reflecting - Blog Post #1
I can't lie, a part of me missed these weekly blog responses, and looking for the appropriate reactions memes to sneak in wherever appropriate possible.
This semester, my blog will be focused on entries for English 5020: Theory and Practice. To get started, this week we were assigned two articles; "One Approach to Guiding Peer Response" by Kim Jaxon, and "On Reflection" by Kathleen Blake Yancey.
To begin with, Jaxon's piece. I immediately found her topic of guiding peer response to be both interesting and pertinent, because I am all too familiar with unhelpful peer responses on papers. The general reaction to the peer review process, even to the college level, seems to be, "Peer review? Great, so I don't have homework tonight!" Whether this is due to lazieness, or general confusion on the goals of the peer review process, I think Jaxon's guidance is helpful.
In the article, she stipulates several guidelines that, if utilized, would offer help to the writer and encourage the reader/reviewer to refine his or her close reading and editing skills. She goes on to cover several key issues that are involved in peer editing, and includes an appendix of what a successful peer review should look like. A point I appreciated in particular was her differentiation between editing and revision-- focusing on the content and ideas, first and foremost. I intend to hold on to this article because it could one day be incorporated into guidelines for peer review which, as I mentioned above, are necessary on all grade levels. I wish my professors had supplied these guidelines, because I may have received far more insightful feedback that "Good job!" on the many papers of my college career.
Thoughtful feedback is valuable, and my favorite point that Jaxon made was that a successful peer response should respect and value the work that the writer has done, and what they have to say. I couldn't agree more.
I refer you back to my comment on including memes "wherever appropriate possible."
Next, I'll move on to "On Reflection." Yancey's piece ties in nicely with Jaxon's because it focuses on another underutilized part of the writing process- reflection on one's own writing skills and the knowledge gained through the writing process. Although, over the years, there have been several different theories and approaches to composition, Yancey chooses to focus on the importance of reflection.
It appears, from Yancey's findings, that directing students to reflect on their writing- finding the whats and the whys- gives them the ability to think more consciously about the project they are working on: "Reflection here is used...in a way consonant with the times: as a mode of behavior indicative of growth of consciousness" (4).
Yancey's analysis of reflection involves three processes which is delves into throughout this chapter. First, it involves setting goals, then revising "in the light of introspection" (6) then, finally, articulation of the learning process that has just taken place. I like this process because, as she explains it, learning is the important part. Both in school and in life, being able to explain oneself is crucial. This reminds me of something my mom has always said-- "If you understand it, you can explain it.'
Much like Jaxon, Yancey focuses on the outcome of proper writing instruction, rather than focusing on strict adherence to grammar and form. Whereas Jaxon writes about the helpfulness of student reviews, and the insight that can be gained from a well thought-out response, Yancey focuses on self-reflection, and true learning gained from the writing process. I particularly appreciated what Dewey said on the subject: "While we cannot learn or be taught how to think, we do have to learn how to think well...especially how to acquire the general habit of reflecting" (qtd. in Yancey 9).
More often than not, I think we are programmed to "do." We do things because we're told to, without question but, while writing is important, learning how to think it also crucial. After all, what's the point of an assignment if it's done for the sake of getting it done? Reflection is not always easy coming, but it is a crucial step in the writing and learning process.
This article also made me think about reflection as a way to sharpen and refine the mind. This most specifically struck me on page 10, when Yancey cites Vygotsky's theory that "Reflection...requires both kinds of thinking, the scientific and the spontaneous, the strength of scientific concepts deriving from their 'conscious and deliberate character,' the spontaneous from 'the situational, empirical, and practical." I really like this summary, and it made me think deeper about the overall process of reflection. I look forward to further discussing these articles in class. It will be especially interesting to hear the perspective of the teachers who can carry forth the ideas introduced in these papers to apply to real-life class settings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)