Elaborating Our History: A Look at Mid-19th Century First Books of Composition

Writing practices of the mid-19th century sound similar to what contemporary high school students were and, in some cases, are expected to practice. Lucille Schultz looks at how teaching writing and approaching writing were viewed in the 19th century. I must say that I agree with some of John Walker's beliefs about teaching writing; but for the most part, I really like John Frost and his outlook on writing.

Walker's text book is interesting. He offers four main sections to the book - themes, regular subjects, easy essays, and narrative. It sounds much like any other composition text book I have seen. Specific explanations are given and writing samples are provided. In the section titled themes, Walker asks the writer to offer some statement of truth with appropriate support. That is what any teacher would expect from a student. In the section titled regular subjects, Walker explores the modes of writing - definition, cause, effects, etc. The regular subjects offer a scaffold for the themes. I agree with this format since I, as a teacher in a high school, expect ample support in my students' writing as well as an evident format. However, I disagree with Walker when he states that young writers need to memorize rules first before writing. That, to me, sounds like regurgitation. I despise the word because of the image it evokes. Regurgitation is as bad an image as stagnant. Both are disgusting, literally and metaphorically. I tell my students that I do not want them to regurgitate information they have read, memorized, or heard in class; nor do I want them to become stagnant in their writing styles. Regurgitation and stagnation do not allow growth to occur; therefore, I disagree with Walker on his point about memorization before creation.

Frost, however, has a similar pedagogy to present writing practices and how it is taught today. Students can be given a prompt about literally anything and will respond using their personal experiences as a baseline. It is almost impossible not to draw from your experiences. The summer vacation prompt is a classic prompt still used today in many classrooms. I think these simple prompts allow students to become comfortable with their writing subject and writing ability.

Yet, I did notice that remediation can become necessary in higher grade levels, such as a collegiate level, when writing in the lower grades becomes too loose. Many of our high school graduates are enrolled in remedial courses because of the lack of structure or instruction in high school. One thing Walker and Frost both touch on is structure and instruction. Young writers need structure and direct instruction in order to create a composition. Whether the student learns the grammar and writing rules first or experiments with writing first, as long as structure is available to the child/student, then success and growth is almost always guaranteed.

Structure of curriculum has not changed so much from the mid-19th century. Those who were no doubt going to attend universities were taught writing skills for that learning environment; those who were going into the workforce were only taught the basic skills needed to succeed in the chosen field. That is not so different from the arrangement of English classes today. We, as educators, encourage our students to attend post-secondary schools, but I personally don't insist on it (I feel that I would be pushing my middle-class values on them if I did insist). Not all students are college material - there, I said it. But that does not give me the right to deny any student the opportunity to try to accelerate and achieve. I teach basic writing to all students, real world writing skills (memos, email/Internet etiquette, letters, resume, report writing, etc.) as well as expository writing so they can learn to better express themselves no matter what they choose to pursue after graduation.

Some schools ability group (tracking is a no-no in public education); those who are labeled advanced based on test scores are placed in a class with other students of the same abilities, those who are average are grouped together, and the low students are grouped together. This poses many issues, but this is neither the time nor the place to discuss right now. Getting back to my point, our course offerings allow students to choose what type of writing experience they will have. Honors and Advanced Placement Language and Literature courses allow students who are high achievers the opportunity to grow as students and embrace the university expectations prior to attendance. These are the same students referenced in Schultz's article. The curriculum and literature are "preparing the upper-class students for careers in the law and ministry". May not so much ministry any more, but definitely high paying and prestigious careers. But, every student has the opportunity to enroll in the rigorous class. The end question is are the students enrolled in the classes willing to work?

I guess my whole point is the teacher must look at student needs first. What must the student need in order to survive no matter what choice is made after graduation? Start with basic writing and understand the foundations of writing first, then advance to more complex forms of writing. This will allow students to express themselves as well as reflect, grow, and defend, support, argue, communicate their ideas with others in a clear and concise manner. Frost and Walker are both right in some of their beliefs about writing. Looking at the different pedagogies is really allowing me to piece together my own theory and belief about writing and teaching writing.