Against the Odds

This is the first article I have read of four that has meant anything to me. As a teacher, I can totally relate to the pressures Bishop describes. The best of us give our all with very little appreciation in sometimes volatile and unpleasant environments, working with people who don't care about the trends because they come and go. This article reassured me as to why I do what I do - it is for those who are the "underdogs" and are seeing things for the first time. I do, like any good teacher, experience 'burn-out' each year; but I keep going because I feel I need to and I want to.

I really liked what Bishop said about collaboration and professional development. We, as educators, are shown so many different methods of teaching writing, reading, methods in classroom management, cooperative learning techniques, assessment and enrichment; the list goes on and on. As educators the question is how can we use all of the different methods in one classroom in one school year without feeling overloaded - do we just close our doors and teach? I've been told to do that, as well as leave the door open so my room is more inviting and welcoming. But then that conflicts with safety issues...blah, blah, blah. My job is to keep kids safe, offer them opportunity, enrich their lives, and pray they succeed. I like working with my peers to create a curriculum that might be beneficial for students as well as fun to teach; I like to encourage my colleagues to see things in a new light and try new methods even if they are a bit apprehensive. Doing the same thing over and over and over each year will cause the 'burn-out', weariness, fatigue, boredom, repetition, beat, blase, spent, played out, sleepy, uninterested, on last leg teacher. We, just like our students, do not like to be talked at; we thrive being talked with. We like to share, listen, and celebrate with each other our trials, tribulations, and successes. It is what we are as teachers, parents, friends, children, colleagues, spouses, etc. In our lives, we find a balance and that balance depends upon how we cope with our experiences everyday.

I think each of us could possibly write our own "Convention Poem", except replace convention with teacher or scholar. We all have experiences to share and can possibly relate to those experiences. I read Nic's "Teacher Poem", and I can totally see what he is talking about. We have all been there at one point or another but are maybe afraid to say it out loud to avoid sounding like the pessimist or whiner. But if we can't depend on one another for the support we need, they what is the use of doing the job? Bottom line - we don't do the job for our egos, families, or wallets; we do it for the kids seeing things for the first time, pursuing success, and ultimately becoming members of our community. The cycle is never ending.

Packaging Theory

Jeffrey Williams talks a lot about the growth of theory throughout the transformation of anthologies. I understand he thinks the best way to teach theory is to include the different types of theories throughout history to create one "perfect" course in theory.

Theories change throughout history, and what influences the theory of the moment is what people are experiencing at the time. Theorists and publications are going to be writing and will be written for the general audience to make a name and profit for themselves; theory is an industry, and I think that is what Williams is addressing in his article. Theory has shifted from critical reading and analysis to interpretation of reading. Culture and beliefs greatly influence what the public will believe. Williams states that those who are intellectual, or considered intellectual, will be the most influential. That is true in all cases of society. The more popular a person is, the louder the voice. But who determines who is popular, influential, powerful? Williams seems to address this topic beginning on page 285. The chronological model of theoretical anthologies presents the "superstars" of theory from start to present. If these theorists are worthy of being published in such a book, they must be important - the size of their name in the table of contents proves this. Therefore, they become unquestionable, unapproachable, and untouchable.

Williams also talks about how literature and theory have intertwined causing theory to become an "elite work in literary studies". This type of study is only for those of intellectual advancement, a very limited audience. Which leads to the argument who is determining what is worth reading and critiquing? Who gives whom the power?

When a person reads about a particular theory, whether it is a theory like feminism or a theorist like Foucault, that person is then influenced by the theory or theorist. This can cause a problem in the sense that where does the reader's thought end and the theorist's thought begin? The trend is, and this is what I believe, what is popular at the time is observed by the influential; the influential then state what is popular causing the public to agree and follow. That is what any kind of theory is based on, influence and power.

To find a balance now, with all of the theories available, is the trick. We must be open-minded enough to the theoretical differences, know the trends and understand the historical difference and importance among the theories. I think that is why Williams addresses the coincidence of the publications of anthologies as well as individualizing the major kinds of groupings of theories. Trying to balance everything is the goal; and if accomplished, the perfect theory course and the perfect theory, theoretically, can be created.

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.

Composition at the Turn of the 21st Century

After reading the article by Richard Fulkerson, I have come to the conclusion that what and how people write is a direct result of what people are exposed to and experience. He states, in the very first paragraph, that "those large questions of who we are, what we wish to achieve with students, and how we ought to go about it" are questions raised while trying to develop a curriculum for writing. Is writing formulaic or is it social? I think it is a little bit of both, personally; however, after reading this article I am almost certain it is a result of both.

Fulkerson lists, under Analytical Scheme on page 657, four questions to successfully create a philosophy of writing to construct a composition course. These four questions are answered throughout the article. I have to admit that I did not really find anything interesting until page 655, when he discusses teachers imposing their social values in to the class; hence, CCS. When does a composition class take a turn to the political, religious, or cultural platform? It does seem difficult as a teacher not to impose my values onto a class. However, I do believe that we must be aware of our own prejudices, biases, etc., in order to be effective in the classroom. It is very easy to preach based on literature read in a class, especially if the teacher has a passion about the literature. Our writing prompts tend to sway toward our opinions, our method of teaching tends to be in one direction, and our grading is sometimes based on what we want to hear because it is comfortable for us. Are we really challenging our students to become independent readers and writers, or are we so wrapped up in our own personal agendas and egos that we are harming students by not allowing them to write to their full potential because of a grade?

Students are so concerned about grades and pleasing the professor/teacher to receive a high grade, that they tend to lose sight of what is important to them. Fulkerson states that "students are free to write their papers from any perspective they choose. They have only to make a thoughtful case for their position." However, because of that ever looming grade, students will choose not to oppose the professor/teacher. Writing is very intimate and a level of trust, respect, and comfort must be gained in order for a student's writing to be honest; but does the instructor allow for that kind of relationship to develop and prosper? Composition instructors should teach how to write, but not what to write. Topic is most times irrelevant; what is important is can a student support what he or she is discussing. Fulkerson seems to support this when he states, "Many traditional features of academic writing, such as having a clear argumentative thesis and backing it up to convince the reader, are put on a back burner." It is essential to teach the fundamentals of writing to understand writing.

Ownership of writing is another issue raised through Fulkerson's article. What influences the writing? Personal, cultural, political, religious, familial, etc. experiences have some sort of influence on an author. Fulkerson speaks about the expressive teacher. An expressive teacher may want to help students "mature and become self-aware, more reflective", or using writing as a "healing" method or "therapy", or write for "creative self-expression". Isn't composition all of these things - the more expressive the to the different types of composition, the more well-rounded the composer? Writing is an art form and those who write well project their voice without preaching. Their tone is clear as well as their message. When teaching writing, don't we want to make it attractive to students? The order of the modes of writing naturally lend themselves to begin "expressive" writing starting with personal narrative (the 'I' writing) finishing with analysis and synthesis (the 'why' writing).

Writing is a process and it must be taught as a process. Fulkerson addresses this issue at length. Teachers teach writing as a process, baby steps. Once a basic process is learned and understood, a writer can add, delete, modify the writing to fit personal needs and/or styles. New writers need guidance and the writing process is a good start. Does that mean a writer must always first brainstorm, then draft, revise, edit, and publish? Possibly. But once a writer is comfortable with his or her style of process, the writing becomes personal and exciting to the author.

I agree with Fulkerson when he states that teachers "want argument from their students" but need to be supported with data. Again, topic is irrelevant; can you support what you are saying using factual information. Argumentative and persuasive writing go hand-in-hand and are the most difficult modes of writing to complete because this writing utilizes higher order thinking skills. This is where a teacher can run into some difficulty. There does seem to be some confusion when a teacher teaches one thing and expects another. I also agree with the Fulkerson's philosophy that the teacher needs to be very clear as to what he or she expects from the students' writing. Again, new writers need guidance.

I did have difficulty with the genre section of the article. Genre is found in literature (i.e. fiction, nonfiction, poetry, drama, etc.). Modes are found in writing (narrative, descriptive, compare/contrast, cause/effect, problem/solution, definition, etc.). I believe that mode creates genre. Take any piece of literature. Universal themes exist across the literary board; Shakespeare is a prime example. A student could take any one of the modes to write a paper in a Shakespearean genre class using any of the universal themes found in any one of the plays - power, greed, religion, politics, jealousy. Themes are found in a genre leading to discovery through writing. Literature and writing go hand-in-hand.

This entire article made me realize and reiterated three things: 1) do not impose my values/beliefs on to students if I want honest writing, 2) writing is a process to help student growth in the academic, personal, and professional world, 3) writing and literature are partners.

Why Comp./Theory?

Writing is a very important type of communication. People write thank you notes, memos, letters, stories, etc. It is our way of communicating with the world in which we live. My first and main reason for obtaining an MA in English was for job/career advancement; however, as I have traveled through classes thus far, I realize how much I have grown and learned from the experience. I am rejuvenated and extcited about learning and teaching again. No longer do I feel stagnant, and I believe that excitement has made me more effective in the classroom as a teacher and student. I truly believe one must practice what he/she preaches, and I feel I am definitely practicing.

As a teacher, I have always guided (told) my high school students what or how to write. I have done it for a few years now; but enrolling in this graduate program, I realize that it is much more difficult to write something than it is to teach it. I can teach the modes of writing, the research paper using MLA and APA formats, the resume and business letter format, but doing so myself creates a far greater challenge. I have set ego aside through this learning process and actually listened to my peers. I have experienced much personal growth. I expect that of my students, so it must not be that bad - the best way to lead is by example, right? So far, my experience as a student has made me more aware of what my expectations for my students are and my expectations for me.

Writing allows us to explore who we are, where we come from, where we are going, what we value, and what we believe. Our best writing comes from what we know. I have pondered authorship, its existance and origin. What we write is usually based on what we have experienced as an individual and what we feel is necessary for others to know. Writing is very personal and intimate; it is very difficult to tell someone what to write and how to write it because who then is the author? Again, that seems to lead back to the notion of authorship. For whom are we really writing - ourselves, our audience, our teacher (who is ultimately incharge of the assessment and grade)? What is truly influencing our writing and why do we feel the need to write? These are some questions I have asked many times throughout the past semester after looking at literature through a different "lens" and focusing that "lens" a little more.

I hope this course allows me to understand how to teach young minds (so cliche' I know) to embrace writing for themselves, not for me or anyone else. I hope to offer some balance between structure and guidance without imposing my values/beliefs so they show in my students' writings. But how can my values/beliefs not be imposed when I am influencing people based on what I say? We are constantly being influenced everyday; so how do we remain an individual? Who is the real author?