Showing posts with label Quotes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Quotes. Show all posts

Friday, May 13, 2016

My New Teaching Mantra:

But teaching, I am convinced, is not about us being brilliant; it is about students being brilliant. It’s about them, after all. And the only way they can do this is to give them that generous gift of time and receptivity. There are few generalizations that hold for all good teachers, but I will hazard this one: Good teachers never appear rushed. Or make students feel rushed. 


Tom Newkirk, "Teachers, Know When To Stop Talking"

Sunday, May 31, 2015

Great Comp Quotes

Comp Quotes to Live By: What are we finding out? One point is becoming clear is that writing is an act of discovery for both skilled and unskilled writers; most writers have only a partial notion of what they want to say when they begin to write, and their ideas develop in the process of writing…. Another truth is that usually the writing process is not linear, moving smoothly in one direction from start to finish. It is messy, recursive, convoluted, and uneven. Writers write, plan, revise, anticipate, and review throughout the writing process, moving back and forth among the different operations involved in writing without any apparent plan. No practicing writer will be surprised at these findings: nevertheless, they seriously contradict the traditional paradigm that has dominated textbooks for years... (Maxine Hairston, p. 12, "Winds of Change")

To sum up: Writing is a complex act, integrally related to learning and knowing, and performs a variety of functions. It is not a discrete clearly definable skill learned once and for all; moreover, both in school and at work, writing is seldom the product of isolated individuals but rather and seldom obviously, the outcome of continuing collaboration, of interactions that involve other people and other texts. Writing practices are closely linked to their sociocultural contexts, and writing strategies vary with individual and situation. (Worlds Apart, Dias et al. p. 10)

"Education is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self confidence." -- Robert Frost --

The most valuable political act any teacher can perform is not to impose particular political views but to teach students to see the words that society tries to inject into them unseen. (Wayne Booth, The Vocation of a Teacher, p. 154)

"The teacher of writing, first of all, must be a person for whom the student wants to write." (Donald Murray)

George Cambell: rhetoric is the attempt to "to enlighten the understanding, to please the imagination, to move the passions, or to influence the will."

In the end, however, the underlying philosophical assumptions still seem less significant to me than the way in which a writing teacher answers this question: should a writing course be organized around production or consumption? It is around this very basic question that (at least) two paths diverge, and how a teacher chooses usually makes all the difference. (Lad Tobin, "Process Pedagogy", p 15 in A Guide to Composition Pedagogy)

Everyone teaches the process of writing, but everyone does not teach the same process. The test of one's competence as a composition instructor [...] resides in being able to recognize and justify the version of the process being taught. (James Berlin, "Contemporary Composition: The Major Pedagogical Theories", p. 777 in College English, Dec. 1982)

Monday, April 20, 2015

Stats on RIC

Last Friday, Dr. Tom Schmeling and I testified in front of the RI House Finance Committee Sub-Committee on Education about how Rhode Island College students are suffering because of poor state funding for Higher Education.  Testimony from students about how difficult it is to pay for College, and how their lives have been impacted by working more than students at any New England peer institution, would be influential.  This factors strongly into Performance Based Funding, because the institutions of public higher education in the state will be evaluated by how many of our students graduate in 4 and 6 years, and yet in many cases work requirements (made necessary by difficulty paying tuition and making ends meet) limit students’ ability to complete 15 credits a semester (which is the norm required to graduate in 4 years.)

I quote here from Dr. Schmeling’s testimony last Friday:

"Since FY2008, Rhode Island’s educational appropriations per full-time equivalent student declined 24%, measured in constant dollars (SHEF p.32). 

In support for public higher education, Rhode Island ranks:
  • 44th in the nation in educational appropriations per full time student 2014 (SHEF p.39).
  • 46th in higher education funding per capita (SHEF p.46).
  • 46th in higher education funding per $1000 personal income (SHEF p.46).
  • 48th in the percentage of state revenue allocated to higher education.
As a result of declining state support, tuition at Rhode Island institutions of higher learning has risen 34.6% since 2008 .
  • We are 45th in net tuition burden as a percent of total public higher education revenue. That is, we ask our students to bear more of the cost of their education than all but five states (p.33)
  • Rhode Island is one of only six states where the student tuition burden is more than twice the amount of support provided by the state (p.33)
  • In short, across multiple measures of state financial commitment to higher education, Rhode Island is consistently at the bottom of the heap. For those of us who believe that investment in public higher education is a key source of economic mobility for our citizens and of economic growth for the state, it is both disturbing and embarrassing to find that Rhode Island has sunk so low in state rankings on education funding.
These cuts have a clear impact on our students’ ability to complete a college education. For instance, significantly more RIC students have to work off campus to make tuition than at other New England Public Colleges. 31% of RIC seniors work thirty or more hours per week at off-campus jobs, a rate which is about 50% higher than for students at other New England Colleges . Students who must spend so much time working to pay for college cannot devote the time needed to achieve academic excellence. They have a harder time completing a degree in four, five or even six years, and they are more likely to drop out."

Dr. Schmeling is using the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association's State Higher Education Finance Report (SHEF).

Saturday, March 28, 2015

What I Learn in School

What I Learn in School

  • That there are discrete borders which demarcate areas of knowledge, and there is little traffic between these strange lands. But this is all of little concern to the economy.
  • That I can go an entire day without speaking to anyone.
  • That I can stare at a single point in space, on the wall, say, and make it go out of focus. And then bring it back. There must be some curricular objective that I am failing to meet at any given point. But this tiny rebellion, while indefinite, can seem worthwhile.
  • That life is a series of arbitrary questions of mysterious — no, dubiousorigin.
  • That my life goes better when I follow the rules and parrot the predilections of authority figures.
  • That my responses-to-stimuli are scrutinized by subjective scientists who may or may not in a given moment have my interest at heart. Or even be able to help me.
  • That I am better when I make life easier on the teacher — late homework is the only thing worse than incorrect answers. (Well, and novel answers.)
  • That learning is about being correct — never take chances.
  • That knowledge is a list of facts.
  • That knowing consists of reproducing the selfsame facts from memory after some designated time. Unprocessed, untouched, in their original sequence. Alone, without talking, without any of the resources that would be, in a less controlled environment, at my disposal.
  • When I am called upon to produce — and I am called upon to produce regularly, or rather irregularly, but frequently — I must produce. An answer to a question the asker knows (why is he asking then?), a meaningless data set, a paragraph, a prefabricated structure of discourse that is predictable, vacuous, and devoid of any real… ideas? At least the kind that can be transformative, and thus dangerous. What was I saying?
  • Produce, produce, produce. No time to stop and think. In season, and out of season.
  • That I am a product of periodically entered integers out of ten, or out of one-hundred, crunched, weighted, and curved. Carved in stone.
  • That doing better than my neighbor results in accolades, and these are a public reward. And being praised feels nice, and I could get used to it. And the drudgery is just… necessary? Especially compared to the benefits, which are kinda nice. And totally worth it.
  • That there is no need to develop interests / passions / perspectives / arguments / expertise of my own.
  • That my path will be laid out before me in the form of a checklist, in Times New Roman. It is for me to walk that path and trust in its goodness.
  • Grades, by their very nature, are sacred. They come from On High and represent an objective measure of my worth. And a reliable predictor of my future.
  • That questions are to be answered; authority is not to be questioned. To ingratiate myself with authority is the answer.
  • That the worst kind of question is the kind I actually want to know the answer to.
  • That the path of least resistance is the path to take.

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
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.

Thursday, December 4, 2014

The Habits of Highly Productive Writers

Many writers I know love Joyce Carol Oates—some even refer to her as JCO, as if she were a brand as recognizable as CBS or BMW. But just as often, the mention of her name is met by groans and complaints about how much she’s written. Her productivity seems like an affront.
When someone’s doing a lot more than you, you notice it. It brings out your petty jealousy. And if you’re like me (occasionally petty and jealous), it might make you feel crappy about yourself. Which is, let’s face it, ridiculous. No one else’s achievements take anything away from yours, or mine. The fact that another writer is working hard and well should be nothing more than inspiration, or at least a gentle prod.
So I started to think about the practices of highly productive writers. What are the personality traits and habits that help people crank out the pages? Here are a few that occur to me:
They reject the notion of "writer’s block" the way others shun gluten. Some people are truly unable to tolerate that vilified protein, but many more leap after a culprit to explain their dyspepsia or inability to refrain from carby deliciosity. Maybe cutting out a big food group makes it easier to stick to a diet than being careful about portion sizes of crusty bread and pasta puttanesca. Certainly there’s a comfort in diagnosis, relief in the idea that suffering can be linked to a thing that others also get. Likewise, it’s a lot easier to say that the muse has gone AWOL than to admit that writing is hard and requires discipline and sacrifice.
Productive writers don’t reach for excuses when the going gets hard. They treat writing like the job it is. They show up, punch the clock, and punch out. Nothing romantic about it. They give themselves a quota; sometimes it’s butt-in-chair time, sometimes a word count. Simple math allows you to figure out how quickly 1,000 words a day adds up to a book-length work. These writers know how to use deadlines, whether external or self-imposed, to stay on track.
They don’t overtalk their projects. Some writers like to talk about writing more than they actually like to write. Others dine out for years on their topics—giving conference papers, writing journal articles, applying for grants—until they’ve all but lost interest in what they are supposed to be writing. One prolific academic writer told me that he often gets interested in something and spends a few months working before he realizes it’s not going to pan out. He puts it aside without ever having talked about it. Only once it’s well under way will he discuss it. I have been accused of being "secretive" about my work. I’m not; some pieces benefit from yammering, and others don’t.
They believe in themselves and their work. Perhaps it’s confidence, perhaps it’s Quixote-like delusion, but to be a prolific writer you have to believe that what you’re doing matters. If you second-guess at every step, you’ll soon be going backward. A writer I know likes to say that over the years he has "trained" his family not to expect him to show up for certain things, because they know his work comes first. You have to be willing to risk seeming narcissistic and arrogant, even if you don’t like to think of yourself that way. The work takes priority.
And they might hate themselves a little if they slack off. Along with the necessary arrogance and narcissism, a dollop of self-hatred goes a long way toward getting stuff done. You have to believe it’s your job to be productive and to feel bad if you’re not.
They know that a lot of important stuff happens when they’re not "working." I love this passage from Graham Greene’s novel The End of the Affair: "I was trying to write a book that simply would not come. I did my daily five hundred words, but the characters never began to live. So much in writing depends on the superficiality of one’s days. One may be preoccupied with shopping and income tax returns and chance conversations, but the stream of the unconscious continues to flow, undisturbed, solving problems, planning ahead: one sits down sterile and dispirited at the desk, and suddenly the words come as though from the air: the situations that seemed blocked in a hopeless impasse move forward: the work has been done while one slept or shopped or talked with friends."
Productive writers have been through the cycle enough to know it’s a cycle, and sometimes you figure out problems while you’re walking the dog. They know to trust that and don’t get twitchy when the pages stop piling up.
They’re passionate about their projects. Too much scholarly work is obviously produced without heat. Some academics take so long to finish a book they can barely remember what interested them about the topic in the first place. Productive people become impatient and seek out new thrills. They like to learn stuff.
Chipping away at something for years or decades can lead to a pile of dust or to a finely made and intricately tooled piece of art. It’s often hard to know which one you’re working toward. It can help to delude yourself into channeling Donatello or Brancusi even if what you’re looking at seems like a bunch of shavings.
They know what they’re good at. Dave Eggers wrote that for him, at least at the beginning of his career, writing fiction was like driving a car in a clown suit. It’s important to find the project and the approach that will work for you and will let you use your own real and valuable skills to best effect.
Perhaps academics find themselves traumatized by writing because they’re trying to sound like some "smart" version of themselves. Their writing comes off as inauthentic. Often, however, these same people can talk about their ideas in a way that makes you want to listen for hours. The best writing is a conversation between author and reader. Too much scholarly work reads like someone driving a car in a clown suit. If these folks could write more like they teach—be themselves on the page—the work would surely benefit.
They read a lot, and widely. I’m always amazed when professors say they don’t have time to read for fun. How else can you attempt to write something good? If you don’t think that your work should be a pleasure to read, most of us won’t want to read it. Productive writers (should) pay attention to craft and read to steal tricks and moves from authors they admire. Reading becomes a get-psyched activity for writing. Anyone who’s ever assigned (or done) an exercise in imitation knows that.
They know how to finish a draft. As with relationships, beginnings are exciting and easy, full of hope and promise. Middles can get comfortable. You fall into a routine and, for a while, that can be its own kind of fun. But then many of us hit a wall. Whether it’s disillusion, boredom, or self-doubt, we crash into stuckness. Productive authors know that they have to keep going through the hard parts and finish a complete draft. At least you’ve got something to work from.
They work on more than one thing at once. Of course, when you hit that wall, it’s tempting to give up and start on something new and exciting (see above, re: beginnings are easy). While that can lead to a sheaf of unfinished drafts, it can also be useful. Some pieces need time to smolder. Leaving them to turn to something short and manageable makes it easier to go back to the big thing. Fallowing and crop rotation lead to a greater harvest.
They leave off at a point where it will be easy to start again. Some writers quit a session in the middle of a sentence; it’s always easier to continue than to begin. If you know where you’re headed the next time you sit down, you’ll get there faster. There’s an activation-energy cost to get things brewing. Lower it however you can.
They don’t let themselves off the hook. If only I had three hours of quiet every day. If only I had the perfect office. If only my hair weren’t so frizzy. People often say to writers, "Oh, I’d love to write a book, if only I had the time," as if it’s merely a question of having a leisurely spell to sit noodling at your computer.
You have time only if you make it a priority. Productive writers don’t allow themselves the indulgence of easy excuses. When they start to have feelings of self-doubt—I can’t do this, it’s too hard, I’ll never write another good sentence—they tell themselves to stop feeling sorry for themselves and just do the work.
They know there are no shortcuts, magic bullets, special exercises, or incantations. I am suspicious of strategies that diminish the time and effort required to do good work. Write your dissertation in five minutes a day? Complete a book in 60 days? Maybe you’d like to try the KitKat Diet, or purchase a lovely bridge?
There are no tricks to make it easier, just habits and practices you can develop to get it done.
- See more at: http://m.chronicle.com/article/The-Habits-of-Highly/150053/#sthash.egupstC0.dpuf

Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Why I Write Bad (MILO B. BECKMAN)

The Harvard Crimson
November 21, 2014

I just turned in a final paper. When it was finished, I gussied up the spacing and switched the font to Georgia. I stapled it neatly at a 45-degree angle, with a professional-looking cover page on top. Before my TF takes in a single word, he can deduce that I’m a smart guy and he’s about to read a great paper.

Here’s the problem: It’s not a great paper. I didn’t have a lot of points to make, so I made them glamorously. I used lots of adverbs. My title has a colon in it. There are 21 words in an average sentence, six letters in an average word. An online analysis tells me I’m writing at a 16th grade level. My TF is gonna love it.

Steven Pinker wrote in the Chronicle recently that academics have their heads too far up their own rears to write well. They know so much, he says, that they can’t imagine what it’s like to be a layman. But I think the problem is more systemic than that. Academics put out lousy writing because they went through 20 years of schooling that rewarded lousy writing.

What causes this upside-down incentive system? It’s signaling, plain and simple. You don’t have time to write good papers, and graders don’t have time to read them. No one ever got fired for buying IBM, so they slap a check-plus on whatever looks good. Consciously or subconsciously, you tune your writing to do just that: to look good. Who cares if it actually is good?

This is why my academic writing stinks. I’ll hammer out a response paper the hour before it’s due, throwing in as many “normative”s and “dichotomy”s as I can muster. “Do I sound smart yet?” my writing pleads. It’s all icing—like the staple and the font choice—layers and layers of icing on a tiny, bland cake. My TFs will often tell me I’ve improved as a writer over the semester, when really I’ve just figured out which kind of bullshit they prefer. Why risk writing something good in the hopes it’ll be recognized as good, when I can write garbage I know will be recognized as good?

This is also why section kid bothers you so much. You roll your eyes when he ends every sentence with “by any stretch of the imagination.” He’s building a McMansion of words, all oversized and gaudy and totally empty. Your TF’s eyes glazed over at the first, “Just to run with that for a minute…” She’ll give him full marks for participation. You hate him for shamelessly playing the game. But can you blame him?

This is even a driving force behind grade inflation. In a world where good ideas get good grades, the average would be around a C. Real eureka moments don’t come often. But in a world where fancy words get good grades, any skilled hoop-jumper can learn the formula and churn out regular As.

This is dangerous. The high marks seem nice today, but when we get spit out into the real world we’ll see the harm it’s done. I’ve nearly forgotten how to write simply. When I’m not paying attention, I quickly recommence pontificating mellifluously. Your boss won’t want 12 pages double-spaced; she’ll want clarity and pith. Interviewers would rather you be a real human who says things like “chill” and “legit” than some academic robot who won’t stop talking about intents and purposes.

So why not get a head start and cut the crap now? Spend more time coming up with ideas and less time beautifying them. Start your paper when you hit a thesis you’re excited about, not when you think, “I could probably argue that.” If you have a good point to make in section, you’ll sound just as smart leading with, “I dunno though,” as with, “Just to push back on that.” And to paraphrase a proverb: If you don’t have anything to say, don’t say anything at all.

 It’s not our fault that the system’s broken, but it’s on us to fix it. We have to change our habits even if we’re incentivized not to. Yes, a high GPA will help you get a job, but it’s your skills that’ll help with every step after that. Don’t boost your grades by developing toxic habits. Develop good habits, and the grades should follow. When you bullshit, you’re just bullshitting yourself. Stop it. Write well. Milo B. Beckman ’15 is a government concentrator in Eliot House.

Saturday, November 1, 2014

Findings from Research on Writing

Three lessons from the science of how to teach writing

* “Research-Based Practices and the Common Core: Meta-Analysis and Meta Synthesis,” (in press for The Elementary School Journal)--Steve Graham

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Confessions of a Not-So-Careful Proofreader

I appreciate the feedback. Your comments actually didn't really surprise me. I think I already knew that I make plenty of small mistakes (that I should not even be making at this point in my life). However it might stem from that fact that I never had a teacher who took the time to teach the class about grammar. Well... I can't remember ever having a teacher who did that. I spent a great amount of time trying to fix it and I hope it looks better. I think I probably need to edit my writing pieces more thoroughly and take my time with them. I admit that I don't look too closely at the structure of my sentences these days.

Thursday, July 18, 2013

The Importance of Being OPEN

From Talia Ghazal's mid-term Memo (ENGL 477.SU2013)


The first piece of knowledge I have gained from both the radio station and magazine is to learn and experience anything and everything at any internship or job. I was aware of this well before beginning work, but I think it sunk in after the first week of work. Looking back at my very first post, I stated how I just want to learn. Whether the knowledge I gain will benefit my future or not, it is still important that I learn from these two internships. I really want to know what it is like to work at both of these companies...” I still stand by this statement. I think any work related experience is vital if one wishes to have a successful career. And I literally mean any job experience. I did not think my work at A.T. Cross would help me get the internship at RI Monthly; little did I know that it was the reason why I was accepted at the magazine. They loved the blurbs I wrote for the pen catalogue and it was exactly what they were looking for. So because I am open to (almost) any experience, it shapes me as a writer. 

Wednesday, April 3, 2013

Comp Quote

Unlike academics who construct their pedagogical task as passing on knowledge (that is, unlike teachers in almost every other academic discipline), composition teachers profess the development of students' abilities.


Preparing a syllabus involves making predictions about how I semesters work will be orchestrated. The obvious predictions made by a syllabus are about timing and pacing. But a teacher preparing a syllabus also makes predictions about who students are and what they want from her class, and she predicts as well how what she knows will be integrated into the class. An experienced teacher of writing knows that what she knows will be modified by the experience of teaching a composition class, and she must admit as well that the conduct of any class is affected by her desires as well as her health and her well being. All of these things can change on a daily or even an hourly basis. When she is preparing a syllabus, she has to guess about how all of this will affect her plans as the group grows or shrinks, I students work together for 15 weeks, as their desires, health, and well-being affect classroom interaction. No wonder that syllabi are difficult to write (215).


Sharon Crowley, Composition in the University (215)

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

The Power of Writing

I might, for instance, say that I believe that it’s crucially important for students to become “better” (in the broadest conceivable sense of that word) writers — but not because they’ll have to write in their workplace, but rather because writing is our most powerful tool for thinking and learning anything, and because it is through writing (and reading — and they are no more separable than speaking and listening) that we can participate effectively in almost any sophisticated intellectual activity or society. (145)

"Worlds Apart: Acting and Writing in Academic & Workplace Contexts" (Russ Hunt)
Technostyle Vol. 18, No. 1 2002 Fall

Monday, February 4, 2013

The More Things Change (III)

During the past few years many of our staff have become concerned about the quality of written and spoken English of our students. This concern is, in a large part, the outgrowth of our graduate program and the realization that advanced students lack, not merely good writing technique, but even an appreciation of the necessity for expressing themselves clearly. They feel that if writing doesn't come easy--and few of us of whom this is true--that it is impossible. They don't see the need for rewriting and polishing.

Professor Wilbur L. Bullock, Acting Chairman of the Department of Zoology (UNH), as qtd. in the Annual Report of the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts (UNH), 6/30/1952

The More Things Change (II)

The overwhelming majority of our students come to us seeking, primarily, material success. They seek preparation for a particular job and they are impatient with any courses or requirements which do not, in their judgment, advance them toward their materialistic goals. These students have been encouraged in their goals by their parents and friends. Their interest in the college diploma as a meal ticket reflects the perennial national quest for material security.

Annual Report of the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts (UNH), 6/30/1952

Saturday, February 2, 2013

The More Things Change (I)

It is important that each member of the faculty, not the college alone but of the University as a whole, understand that he shares responsibility for the success of the student in acquiring an ability to express himself orally and to write with clarity and effectiveness. For whatever reason, young people entering college in these days are handicapped by lack of background; background that in the past was obtained through reading. Currently, most young people, unless they make an effort, acquire their background from the radio and the so-called "funny books", a combination which makes a far from dependable foundation for college work.

excerpted from the UNH "Annual Report of the College of Liberal Arts," 1946-47

Saturday, December 1, 2012

An Ethic of Service in Composition and Rhetoric

Research, teaching, and service—the traditional tripartite division of academic work. The kind of institution and the nature of institutional priorities have some bearing on the arrangement of the first two parts, but service always comes last. From our shared perspective as faculty members and administrators in writing studies, though, the nature of service is both more meaningful and more complicated than this seemingly straightforward arrangement would suggest. For us, service is simultaneously an integral part of the teaching and research that we do (which, we should note, are also virtually inseparable) and a problematic label that is often attached to many of the courses that we teach, especially at the first-year level...more.

Monday, June 18, 2012

About Writing Studies

The following passages were really useful in helping me think about my own field. Taken from Doug Downs book chapter, "Teaching First-Year Writers to Use Texts."

Writing Studies is marked by a free mix of research methodologies from the humanities and social sciences—or in Michael Carter's terms, the meta-genres of research-from-sources and empirical inquiry (396-98)...Despite its positioning in English departments, Writing Studies also often behaves like a social science. While showing discomfort with positivist empirical epistemology (or a humanist's fear of parametric statistics), the field was born in and continues to value data-driven rather than only or purely theoretical analysis... Resulting from this blended epistemology, a given article may work across multiple fields and take methods as it finds them, even though such practice can lead to methodological "looseness" that the fields originating the methods might take issue with. Writing Studies texts also tend to valorize personal experience and believe that more can accurately be said about the experiences of a small number of writers discussed in detail (as through ethnography, case study, longitudinal study, and interview) than about larger datasets generated through experiment with only limited control of variables. At the same time, drawing from their humanities and literary-studies roots, scholars in the field read and analyze textual discourse with unusual sensitivity. Unlike those fields, however, Writing Studies finds as much value in reading unfinished student texts in this fashion as it does literary texts—a distinction Robert Scholes has argued strongly distinguishes the values of Literary Criticism and Writing Studies. (33-34)

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

A new story about Writing

Any regular reader of this blog will know that new story: writing is not the transmission of information but the creation of knowledge. Writing is not perfectible, and there’s a reason the world’s best writers have the world’s best editors. Grammar is merely one of a great number of concerns in writing, not the central one. “Writing” includes composition, not simply inscription: it begins with thinking about what to say and ends in a reader’s hands, not with drafting. Writing is not an empty container into which content is dumped; the container is the content. Thus, writing is a situated activity responding to particular exigencies, different every time, not a universal skill that can be learned once and “mastered.” Revision is developing writing, not fixing it, and thus a sign of mature writing, not bad writing: most professional writers expect that their first draft is a starting point, not an ending point. Writing is not usually the work of lone geniuses inspired by a muse; writers usually work collaboratively with other writers and especially with readers. Writing is usually not easy for good writers, and it is usually not the kind of thing that ought to be.


--Doug Downs, Bedford Bits, May 23, 2012.

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

What is research-writing?

As compositionists should know, research-writing (and therefore research) is not simply about assembling readymade information, but about changing the ways a topic can be looked at and about making new cross-connections between material. (87)

Scott, Patrick. "Bibliographical Problems in Research on Composition." College Composition and Communication 37 (1986): 167-77.