How to Teach With Blogs
What's the Harm in Blogging?
-
Friday, February 27, 2015
MA in Writing Studies
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 11:49:06 -0600
From: "E.D. Woodworth" <edwoodworth@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Announcing a new master's program in teaching writing
Dear all,
Apologies for cross-posting, but this is exciting for our university, and I
wanted to share far and wide. After several years of planning, Auburn
University at Montgomery is proud to announce a new master's degree in
teaching writing.
We are happy to add that we will be offering a course on pedagogy of basic
writing as part of the program (we have a healthy basic writing program), a
writing across the curriculum course (a university-wide program), a course
focused on professional writing, editing, and consultancy (with required
observation/participation hours in a nearby university where our program
runs a grad writing center) as well as other core classes on theory and
practical application. We are also building writing consultancy
relationships with units on our campus and local businesses. We're
delighted to work with our business and education colleges who have
collaborated with us so that our graduate students can easily choose to
take electives in those colleges.
I'm attaching a quick rundown of the program as well as information on the
application process.
This is a degree meant for someone determined to teach writing, coach
writing, or work in a writing center, or move onto a doctoral program in
writing studies. Because we believe writing is vital to any and all
disciplines, we welcome applicants from all bachelor degree programs from
accredited universities/colleges.
Besides the opportunity to teach in their second year, our students will
have the opportunity to work with our learning center and our student
success centers their first year. (We have some funding for applicants
besides teaching stipends in the second year of the program.)
Some of the electives are currently offered online, but the core of the
program is currently only offered as bricks/mortar classes. But besides the
courses in the program, we have at least 36 hours scheduled annually for
composition instructor professional development. We encourage all our
students and instructors to teach a variety of writing courses, to lead
workshops, to learn together.
Above all, we foster an open-hearted pedagogy that empowers our teachers
and students to stretch, to collaborate, to be open to change and new ways
of communicating, sharing, and creating new knowledge. We're a small
school, but we're loaded with big opportunities.
Please share this information with colleagues and students.
Thank you so much for all the ways you have supported the development of
this program. Even though you may not have known it, your thinking on these
lists, your scholarship, and conference presentations guided our work
throughout this lengthy process.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Woodworth
ewoodwor@aum.edu
Dr. E.D. Woodworth, Honors Associate Professor
Director of Composition and Master of Teaching Writing
Department of English & Philosophy
College of Arts & Sciences
Liberal Arts 334
Auburn University at Montgomery
P.O. Box 244023
Montgomery, AL 36124
(334) 244-3376 (dept. office)
From: "E.D. Woodworth" <edwoodworth@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Announcing a new master's program in teaching writing
Dear all,
Apologies for cross-posting, but this is exciting for our university, and I
wanted to share far and wide. After several years of planning, Auburn
University at Montgomery is proud to announce a new master's degree in
teaching writing.
We are happy to add that we will be offering a course on pedagogy of basic
writing as part of the program (we have a healthy basic writing program), a
writing across the curriculum course (a university-wide program), a course
focused on professional writing, editing, and consultancy (with required
observation/participation hours in a nearby university where our program
runs a grad writing center) as well as other core classes on theory and
practical application. We are also building writing consultancy
relationships with units on our campus and local businesses. We're
delighted to work with our business and education colleges who have
collaborated with us so that our graduate students can easily choose to
take electives in those colleges.
I'm attaching a quick rundown of the program as well as information on the
application process.
This is a degree meant for someone determined to teach writing, coach
writing, or work in a writing center, or move onto a doctoral program in
writing studies. Because we believe writing is vital to any and all
disciplines, we welcome applicants from all bachelor degree programs from
accredited universities/colleges.
Besides the opportunity to teach in their second year, our students will
have the opportunity to work with our learning center and our student
success centers their first year. (We have some funding for applicants
besides teaching stipends in the second year of the program.)
Some of the electives are currently offered online, but the core of the
program is currently only offered as bricks/mortar classes. But besides the
courses in the program, we have at least 36 hours scheduled annually for
composition instructor professional development. We encourage all our
students and instructors to teach a variety of writing courses, to lead
workshops, to learn together.
Above all, we foster an open-hearted pedagogy that empowers our teachers
and students to stretch, to collaborate, to be open to change and new ways
of communicating, sharing, and creating new knowledge. We're a small
school, but we're loaded with big opportunities.
Please share this information with colleagues and students.
Thank you so much for all the ways you have supported the development of
this program. Even though you may not have known it, your thinking on these
lists, your scholarship, and conference presentations guided our work
throughout this lengthy process.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Woodworth
ewoodwor@aum.edu
Dr. E.D. Woodworth, Honors Associate Professor
Director of Composition and Master of Teaching Writing
Department of English & Philosophy
College of Arts & Sciences
Liberal Arts 334
Auburn University at Montgomery
P.O. Box 244023
Montgomery, AL 36124
(334) 244-3376 (dept. office)
Wednesday, February 25, 2015
Tuesday, February 24, 2015
Sunday, February 22, 2015
Responding to Student Writing (not exhaustively)
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 13:36:14 -0800
From: Jonathan Hunt <jhunt2@USFCA.EDU>
Subject: voluminous written feedback and "over-efforting" instructors
Dear Colleagues,
A common bit of advice is to avoid overwhelming students with exhaustive
written feedback. As I understand it, it's a problem to provide too many
written comments for a few reasons:
- can be overwhelming or discouraging for novice writers
- makes it difficult for students to discern what Nancy Sommers has
called a "scale of concerns"
- is unlikely to result in comprehensive improvement
- may result in instructor exhaustion and frustration
I'm writing about the last point: how do we help a frustrated, exhausted,
and sometimes desperate colleague stop "over-efforting" in this way (I'm
borrow this term from Claude Steele's Whistling Vivaldi, where it is used
in a very different context)? How can we convince them that they may
actually do better work by commenting less voluminously?
In my experience, writing instructors are sometimes very resistant to
modifying this practice.
Again, there's lots of advice on this... my sense is that avoiding
over-commenting is widely accepted. But is there any research on it? I have
seen some good stuff on feedback for L2 writers, but not for general
rhet-comp.
As always, your wisdom is appreciated.
Jonathan
--
Jonathan P. Hunt
Department of Rhetoric and Language
University of San Francisco
415.422.6685
https://www.facebook.com/rhetoricandlanguageUSF
--
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 22:00:39 +0000
From: "Ericsson, Patricia" <ericsson@WSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: voluminous written feedback and "over-efforting" instructors
Jonathan,
This piece is excellent:
The Complexities of Responding to Student Writing; or, Looking for Shortcuts via the Road of Excess
Abstract: In all academic disciplines college teachers respond to student writing with shortcuts—checksheets, correction symbols, computer style checkers, etc. But while these methods save teachers time, do they help students improve their writing? A survey of research into teacher commentary, conceived of as a contextual discourse activity, initially questions the efficiency of many shortcuts because it finds complexities in all activity areas, in regulation (criteria, rules of genre and mode, disciplinary styles, and standards), consumption, production, representation, and identity. The research, however, also recommends particular shortcuts and methods of revising them for better efficiency and effect. It especially recommends restricting the volume of teacher commentary in ways that are task, discipline, and learner specific.
http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/haswell2006.cfm
________________________
Also, see "Options for Responding to Student Writing" (Peter Elbow)--copy in SSTW folder on my desktop.
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 13:36:14 -0800
From: Jonathan Hunt <jhunt2@USFCA.EDU>
Subject: voluminous written feedback and "over-efforting" instructors
Dear Colleagues,
A common bit of advice is to avoid overwhelming students with exhaustive
written feedback. As I understand it, it's a problem to provide too many
written comments for a few reasons:
- can be overwhelming or discouraging for novice writers
- makes it difficult for students to discern what Nancy Sommers has
called a "scale of concerns"
- is unlikely to result in comprehensive improvement
- may result in instructor exhaustion and frustration
I'm writing about the last point: how do we help a frustrated, exhausted,
and sometimes desperate colleague stop "over-efforting" in this way (I'm
borrow this term from Claude Steele's Whistling Vivaldi, where it is used
in a very different context)? How can we convince them that they may
actually do better work by commenting less voluminously?
In my experience, writing instructors are sometimes very resistant to
modifying this practice.
Again, there's lots of advice on this... my sense is that avoiding
over-commenting is widely accepted. But is there any research on it? I have
seen some good stuff on feedback for L2 writers, but not for general
rhet-comp.
As always, your wisdom is appreciated.
Jonathan
--
Jonathan P. Hunt
Department of Rhetoric and Language
University of San Francisco
415.422.6685
https://www.facebook.com/rhetoricandlanguageUSF
--
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 22:00:39 +0000
From: "Ericsson, Patricia" <ericsson@WSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: voluminous written feedback and "over-efforting" instructors
Jonathan,
This piece is excellent:
The Complexities of Responding to Student Writing; or, Looking for Shortcuts via the Road of Excess
Abstract: In all academic disciplines college teachers respond to student writing with shortcuts—checksheets, correction symbols, computer style checkers, etc. But while these methods save teachers time, do they help students improve their writing? A survey of research into teacher commentary, conceived of as a contextual discourse activity, initially questions the efficiency of many shortcuts because it finds complexities in all activity areas, in regulation (criteria, rules of genre and mode, disciplinary styles, and standards), consumption, production, representation, and identity. The research, however, also recommends particular shortcuts and methods of revising them for better efficiency and effect. It especially recommends restricting the volume of teacher commentary in ways that are task, discipline, and learner specific.
http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/articles/haswell2006.cfm
________________________
Also, see "Options for Responding to Student Writing" (Peter Elbow)--copy in SSTW folder on my desktop.
Tuesday, February 17, 2015
Presenting Rhetoric in a Positive Light
From WPA-L:
If you were going to give a colleague in another department (or a lit person in your own department) a piece that explained what rhetoricians do and why it is fun, interesting, and important, what would that piece be?
We are looking for something to share in the interests of building collegiality and understanding, not to ward off any threat, hostile takeover, or anything of that nature. The things we have found so far tend to veer into the problems of rhetoric, or to use esoteric terms too quickly and abundantly for outsider consumption.
We also want to solicit such pieces from our colleagues.
John R. Edlund, Ph.D.
Professor, English and Foreign Languages
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
Wayne Booth's The Rhetoric of Rhetoric?
Connors and Corbett's "Introduction" to Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student
If you were going to give a colleague in another department (or a lit person in your own department) a piece that explained what rhetoricians do and why it is fun, interesting, and important, what would that piece be?
We are looking for something to share in the interests of building collegiality and understanding, not to ward off any threat, hostile takeover, or anything of that nature. The things we have found so far tend to veer into the problems of rhetoric, or to use esoteric terms too quickly and abundantly for outsider consumption.
We also want to solicit such pieces from our colleagues.
John R. Edlund, Ph.D.
Professor, English and Foreign Languages
California State Polytechnic University, Pomona
Wayne Booth's The Rhetoric of Rhetoric?
Connors and Corbett's "Introduction" to Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student
March 16, 2012
Of all the words that might be applied to Rush Limbaugh’s recent comments about Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke — "vile," "misogynistic" and "repulsive" come to mind — one word that has no place in the discussion is "surprise." Limbaugh has made a phenomenally lucrative career of such comments, mocking women, minorities, and many others with gleeful impunity. In doing so, he has inspired a small but disproportionately loud army of imitators on talk radio, cable television, and, increasingly, in the halls of Congress, whose rhetorical tactics of misinformation, demonization, incendiary metaphors, and poisonous historical analogies have done much to debase public discourse.
To say that the current state of public discourse is abysmal seems self-evident. Toxic rhetoric has become a fact of everyday life, a form of entertainment, and a corporate product. Aside from Limbaugh, the contemporary rhetorical scene features pundits such as Glenn Beck, who once mused on-air about killing a public official with a shovel, and talk radio host Neal Boortz, who compared Muslims to "cockroaches." Politicians can be equally offensive. Allen West, the Florida congressman, has compared the Democratic Party to Nazi propagandists, while California congresswoman Maxine Watershas called Republican leaders "demons." Given the forces of money and the power that support such discourse, it would easy to conclude that there is no remedy for toxic rhetoric and no credible opposing forces working to counteract it.
Such a view, however, would be mistaken. In fact, there is a well-organized, systematic, and dedicated effort taking place each day to promote an ethical public discourse grounded in the virtues of honesty, accountability, and generosity. The site of this effort is largely hidden from public view, taking place in the classrooms of universities and colleges across the United States. Even in academe, the movement for an ethical public discourse is largely overlooked. Indeed, it has been historically underfunded, inadequately staffed, and generally marginalized. I refer, of course, to first-year composition, the introductory writing course required at many public and private institutions.
To some, this may seem counterintuitive. First-year composition — also called academic writing, writing and rhetoric, college composition and other names — is not typically associated with improving public discourse, much less considered a "movement." To students required to take the course, it may initially be seen as a speed bump, an exercise in curricular gatekeeping best dispatched as painlessly as possible. To faculty who do not teach the course, it may inaccurately be dismissed as a remedial exercise in grammar and paragraph formation, functioning somewhere below the threshold of higher education proper.
Yet the first-year writing course represents one of the few places in the academic curriculum, in some institutions the only place, where students learn the basics of argument, or how to make a claim, provide evidence, and consider alternative points of view. Argument is the currency of academic discourse, and learning to argue is a necessary skill if students are to succeed in their college careers. Yet the process of constructing arguments also engages students, inevitably and inescapably, in questions of ethics, values, and virtues.
What do students learn, for example, when learning to make a claim? To make a claim in an argument is to propose a relationship between others and ourselves. For the relationship to flourish, a degree of trust must exist among participants, which means that readers must be assured that claims are made without equivocation or deception. To make a successful claim, then, students practice the virtue of honesty.
In the same way, to offer evidence for claims is both to acknowledge the rationality of the audience, which we trust will reason cogently enough to examine our views justly, and a statement of our own integrity, our willingness to support assertions with proofs. In offering evidence, we practice the virtues of respectfulness and accountability.
And when students include counter-arguments in their essays, when they consider seriously opinions, facts, or values that contradict their own, they practice the most radical and potentially transformative behavior of all; they sacrifice the consolations of certainty and expose themselves to the doubts and contradictions that adhere to every worthwhile question. In learning to listen to others, students practice the virtues of tolerance and generosity.
First-year composition, in other words, is more than a course in grammar and rhetoric. Beyond these, it is a course in ethical communication, offering students opportunities to learn and practice the moral and intellectual virtues that Aristotle identified in his Nicomachean Ethics as the foundation for a good life.
What does this mean for the future of public discourse? Potentially a great deal. Consider the numbers. The Council of Writing Program Administrators (CWPA), the professional association of writing programs, counts 152 university and college writing programs in its ranks. Each program may offer anywhere between 10 and 70 writing courses each semester, in classes of 12 to 25 students. Moreover, the CWPA represents just a fraction of the 4,495 institutions of higher education in the United States, serving some 20 million students. This suggests that even by the most conservative estimate thousands of institutions offer some form of first-year writing, and tens of thousands of students each year — likely many more than that — have opportunities to study the relationships of argument, ethics, and public discourse. Indeed, the first-year writing course is the closest thing we have in American public life to a National Academy of Reasoned Rhetoric, a venue in which students can rehearse the virtues of argument so conspicuously lacking in our current political debates.
Should students bring these virtues to the civic square, they will inevitably transform it, distancing us from the corrosive language of figures such as Rush Limbaugh and moving us toward healthier, more productive, and more generous forms of public argument. This, at any rate, is the promise of the long-maligned first-year writing course.
Such a view, however, would be mistaken. In fact, there is a well-organized, systematic, and dedicated effort taking place each day to promote an ethical public discourse grounded in the virtues of honesty, accountability, and generosity. The site of this effort is largely hidden from public view, taking place in the classrooms of universities and colleges across the United States. Even in academe, the movement for an ethical public discourse is largely overlooked. Indeed, it has been historically underfunded, inadequately staffed, and generally marginalized. I refer, of course, to first-year composition, the introductory writing course required at many public and private institutions.
To some, this may seem counterintuitive. First-year composition — also called academic writing, writing and rhetoric, college composition and other names — is not typically associated with improving public discourse, much less considered a "movement." To students required to take the course, it may initially be seen as a speed bump, an exercise in curricular gatekeeping best dispatched as painlessly as possible. To faculty who do not teach the course, it may inaccurately be dismissed as a remedial exercise in grammar and paragraph formation, functioning somewhere below the threshold of higher education proper.
Yet the first-year writing course represents one of the few places in the academic curriculum, in some institutions the only place, where students learn the basics of argument, or how to make a claim, provide evidence, and consider alternative points of view. Argument is the currency of academic discourse, and learning to argue is a necessary skill if students are to succeed in their college careers. Yet the process of constructing arguments also engages students, inevitably and inescapably, in questions of ethics, values, and virtues.
What do students learn, for example, when learning to make a claim? To make a claim in an argument is to propose a relationship between others and ourselves. For the relationship to flourish, a degree of trust must exist among participants, which means that readers must be assured that claims are made without equivocation or deception. To make a successful claim, then, students practice the virtue of honesty.
In the same way, to offer evidence for claims is both to acknowledge the rationality of the audience, which we trust will reason cogently enough to examine our views justly, and a statement of our own integrity, our willingness to support assertions with proofs. In offering evidence, we practice the virtues of respectfulness and accountability.
And when students include counter-arguments in their essays, when they consider seriously opinions, facts, or values that contradict their own, they practice the most radical and potentially transformative behavior of all; they sacrifice the consolations of certainty and expose themselves to the doubts and contradictions that adhere to every worthwhile question. In learning to listen to others, students practice the virtues of tolerance and generosity.
First-year composition, in other words, is more than a course in grammar and rhetoric. Beyond these, it is a course in ethical communication, offering students opportunities to learn and practice the moral and intellectual virtues that Aristotle identified in his Nicomachean Ethics as the foundation for a good life.
What does this mean for the future of public discourse? Potentially a great deal. Consider the numbers. The Council of Writing Program Administrators (CWPA), the professional association of writing programs, counts 152 university and college writing programs in its ranks. Each program may offer anywhere between 10 and 70 writing courses each semester, in classes of 12 to 25 students. Moreover, the CWPA represents just a fraction of the 4,495 institutions of higher education in the United States, serving some 20 million students. This suggests that even by the most conservative estimate thousands of institutions offer some form of first-year writing, and tens of thousands of students each year — likely many more than that — have opportunities to study the relationships of argument, ethics, and public discourse. Indeed, the first-year writing course is the closest thing we have in American public life to a National Academy of Reasoned Rhetoric, a venue in which students can rehearse the virtues of argument so conspicuously lacking in our current political debates.
Should students bring these virtues to the civic square, they will inevitably transform it, distancing us from the corrosive language of figures such as Rush Limbaugh and moving us toward healthier, more productive, and more generous forms of public argument. This, at any rate, is the promise of the long-maligned first-year writing course.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
More on Writing Minors
From WPA-L
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 15:58:44 -0700
From: Doug Hesse <douglas.hesse@DU.EDU>
Subject: Writing Minors
Dear Colleagues,
For an internal proposal for a new university-wide writing minor, I'm looking for examples of undergraduate minors in writing. I'm looking for a fairly broad minor, one not only in creative writing (common) or professional/technical writing (also common) but that admits a range of possible courses--even across units. (Our minor will have theoretical and applied courses from the Writing Program; English; Media, Film, and Journalism; Communication Studies; Theatre; and others.) We've done a fair amount of research and have turned up examples like the minor supported by the Sweetland Writing Center at Michigan, or the Certificate housed in Liberal Arts at Iowa. We've found useful examples of minors at Syracuse, Miami, Washington University, Carnegie Mellon, Wake Forest, and Davis. I've reviewed the WPA-L archives for messages with "minor" in their headings.
If you have (or know of) a likely candidate minor, please send me an email (dhesse@du.edu).
Thanks,
Doug
Doug Hesse
University of Denver
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2015 15:58:44 -0700
From: Doug Hesse <douglas.hesse@DU.EDU>
Subject: Writing Minors
Dear Colleagues,
For an internal proposal for a new university-wide writing minor, I'm looking for examples of undergraduate minors in writing. I'm looking for a fairly broad minor, one not only in creative writing (common) or professional/technical writing (also common) but that admits a range of possible courses--even across units. (Our minor will have theoretical and applied courses from the Writing Program; English; Media, Film, and Journalism; Communication Studies; Theatre; and others.) We've done a fair amount of research and have turned up examples like the minor supported by the Sweetland Writing Center at Michigan, or the Certificate housed in Liberal Arts at Iowa. We've found useful examples of minors at Syracuse, Miami, Washington University, Carnegie Mellon, Wake Forest, and Davis. I've reviewed the WPA-L archives for messages with "minor" in their headings.
If you have (or know of) a likely candidate minor, please send me an email (dhesse@du.edu).
Thanks,
Doug
Doug Hesse
University of Denver
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)