English 615:01: Composition Instruction:
Pedagogy and
Principles
(for teaching assistants)
Spring 2008
Office Hours: By
appointment
Office: Robinson A 112a. Phone: 993-1187
Classroom: Research I, room 202
There's
nothing so practical as a good theory. --
[E]very act of teaching arises from some set of assumptions about what teachers should teach and how students learn.”—Stephen Wilhoit
Course
Description
From your years of experience as writers and students of writing, you've already acquired a body of assumptions about writing practices whether articulated or not. Part of our work (and fun, I hope) in this course will be to articulate and examine those assumptions, connect them to practice, and situate practice within theoretical perspectives and research on teaching composition. Over the course of the semester, you’ll create a teaching statement and a syllabus that reflect your own teaching style and preferences, your engagement with the course materials, and the learning goals of first year composition at Mason. While I’ve assigned a number of readings, our main focus will be on you the learner and writing teacher in training. In every class, you’ll have opportunities to apply the concepts we’re reading about to your own course design, assignments, and response and evaluation practices.
Here are some of the questions we’ll be concerned with: What skills, processes, forms, and genres should we teach students to write to help them achieve the learning outcomes for first year composition (fyc) and to meet the writing expectations of faculty across disciplines? What is the role of reading/s in fyc? How much reading should be assigned? To what end? To what extent must we acknowledge and work with/in digital writing environments? What theories and research help us respond to these questions and shape our course design and teaching practices?
In my own teaching statement, I describe the values I try to enact in every course and which, for me, also comprise the subject matter of English 615:
· to teach students to be engaged, critical, and reflective writers who know how to ask questions, gather and weigh evidence, and form careful, sustained, and ethical arguments;
· to challenge them to think creatively about problems and to be patient as they struggle to form complex responses;
· to help them become fluent, flexible writers, capable of writing in multiple genres for readers who may have widely varied expectations and evaluative criteria;
· to build a community of learners who respect one another’s diverse identities and approaches to writing but who can also be critical readers of a peer’s position, textual and otherwise.
Our challenge, then, (both yours
and mine) will be to create a course and course materials that engage
students
as active and enthusiastic participants in their own learning. On my
part,
you’ll see that I’ve left room in this syllabus for you to help me
make some decisions about course management--e.g. Should we use
Townhall? A
blog? A wiki? for sharing work—and the shape of the assignments. In the
process, you will also be teaching me, just as your students will
always teach
you something new--about writing, about how they learn, and about
yourself as a
writer and teacher of writing.
Required
texts:
John Bean. Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide
to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the
Classroom.
Luis Alberto
Urea. The Devil’s Highway. The English
department’s Text and Community selection.
Handed
out in class (free):
Teaching
Composition:
Background
The
Online:
Articles sent on email in PDF files
Learning Goals for English 100/101: http://english.gmu.edu/composition/faculty/goals100.php
Teaching Resources, including sample syllabi and a syllabus policy template: http://composition.gmu.edu/faculty/index.php
Recommended:
Kathleen Yancey. Reflection in the Writing
Classroom.
Take 20: Teaching Writing. Free DVD handed out in class.
Useful
sites:
CompPile, a ready
reference to published work in post-secondary comp and rhetoric: http://comppile.tamucc.edu/
WAC Clearinghouse, links to resources and teaching tips for writing across the curriculum: http://wac.colostate.edu/
RhetComp.com, a portal to sites relevant to comp and rhetoric: http://rhetcomp.com/.
Journals on line:
College
Composition and Communication: http://www.ncte.org/cccc/pubs/ccc
Journal of Teaching Writing: www.iupui.edu/_jtw
The Writing Instructor: www.writinginstructor.com
Kairos: A Journal for Teachers of Writing in Webbed Environments: http://english.ttu.edu/kairos
Course Requirements and Grading Percentages:
· Teaching portfolio (teaching statement, syllabus, sample assignment): 35%
· Teaching Tip Sheet: 20%
· Teaching demo and accompanying rationale and reflection: 15%
· Active participation to include: 30%
o Teaching log
o Participation on discussion board (format to be decided)
o In-class participation, classroom observation, peer group work, etc
Policies
to note:
Attendance: I expect you to attend every class. Missing more than one meeting will affect your grade.
Late work: I do take off points for late work depending upon the circumstances. You should talk to me if you’re falling behind.
Students
with disabilities:
Students with documented disabilities are legally entitled to certain
accommodations in the classroom. Students requesting such
accommodation
must present faculty with a
Description
of
Assignments:
·
Teaching
Portfolio: As the culminating assignment for the course, the
portfolio
presents and represents your teaching philosophy, your goals and
expectations
for beginning college writers, the learning outcomes for first year
composition, and the methods by which you and the students will achieve
these
goals and outcomes. You’ll include:
o Initial teaching statement (3-5 pages): After our first class, you’ll write statement of your position on teaching writing and writers. You’ll draw on your own writing experiences, tutoring experiences, and any teaching experience (in any area) you may have. You’ll discuss your sense of what college writers need to learn; your overall goals for first-year composition (fyc) and the writers in the course; any contradictions you’ve encountered thus far based on your experiences as a tutor/mentee; and any questions and doubts you may have as we begin the pedagogy class.
o
“Final”
teaching statement (7-10 pages) (Note:
these things are never final; they are and should be always evolving.): The purpose of this statement is to provide a
rationale and context for the course you’ve designed, the textbook(s)
you’ve selected, and the assignments you intend to give. Along with
your
own thinking and reflection—on your initial statement, on how your
ideas
may have changed from then to now, on your pedagogical values and
choices—you’ll
discuss the composition theories and research that have most influenced
your
thinking. You should refer to at least five of our course readings;
feel free
to include as more readings and other outside readings as these may
have
influenced you. You may also want to consider the following: your own
experiences as a writer, a student in writing courses, a tutor, and a
teacher; other
syllabi you’ve looked at, the class you observed; informal discussions
with other TAs currently teaching; and so on. I see this essay as a
place to
think about and reflect on all the influences that have a bearing on
your
approach to teaching freshmen writers. Feel free to experiment with
voice and
style (yes, you can use “I” and write in “your own
voice”—whatever that may mean to you. You’ve seen in
countless tutoring sessions how complicated this advice can be for
students.)
Your statement should include a Works Cited page.
o
Your “final”
syllabus with an explanatory gloss on your textbook choices; your
course
readings; your assignment sequence and weight of each; and your grading
criteria for the course.
o
A sample
assignment with a cover explanation of your learning goals for the
assignment and how these fit into your overall goals for the course.
o
Reflection
on all of the above (guidelines given out in class).
·
Teaching
Tip Sheet (3-4 pages): You’ll choose the teaching topic and
generate
a list of good ideas for teaching a particular skill (e.g. notetaking);
for
using new technologies (e.g. Facebook); for accommodating diverse
learning styles
(e.g. sketching as pre-writing); for using journals and free writing;
and so
on. Along with the one-page list of ideas, you’ll include an
introductory
rationale for the activity and an annotated bibliography of sources to
consult
for additional ideas and explanations. We’ll compile these tip sheets
into a practical teaching “text” for all of you to have as a
reference. With your permission, we’ll also post them on the
composition
site as a teaching resource.
·
Teaching
demo with pre and post writing: You’ll have about fifteen minutes
to
present a lesson or engage us in an activity (feel free to draw on the
material
you designed to teach your mentor’s class). In that time frame,
you’ll need to explain your goals for the demo and give us time when
you
finish to ask questions and make suggestions. Prior to your teaching
demo,
you’ll give me an outline with a rationale and goals for the activity.
The week following your demo, you’ll give me a 1-2 page post-demo
analysis
(what went well, what you would change, what you still need to do,
etc).
·
Classroom
observation (2-3 pages): Describe what happened and, as nearly as
you can
tell, why it happened, i.e., discuss the lesson in the context of the
teacher’s syllabus, our class readings and discussions, and/or your
tutoring experiences, whatever is relevant.You might also include a
discussion
of techniques the teacher used that you'd like to use yourself or would
not
consider using. If possible, meet with the teacher you've observed so
you can
get his/her feedback on the class. .
·
Teaching
log: In the log, you’ll take notes on aspects of the readings that
seem most relevant to you and make connections among readings, class
discussion, your experiences as a tutor, and so on. You’ll also note
teaching ideas that seem useful to you and/or spark your own ideas
about what
to do/not to do. The logs will be the basis for in-class writing and
discussion. We’ll decide as a group how and whether the logs should be
distributed
and graded.
·
Discussion
board: We’ll decide as a class how and whether we want to use some
form of a discussion board (e.g. Townhall, a WIKI, a listserve) for
sharing
work with peers.
Schedule
(Note: all
assignments are due on the day they are listed)
Part I. The
Act and the
Actors: First-year composition—some history, theory, issues, and lots
of
questions about what we teach and why.
Week One, January 24:
What is good writing? Good college writing? What is the role of first year composition (fyc) in producing “good” college writers? What, if any, guarantees do we make to students and their subsequent teachers when we require fyc? What should we teach? What are we required to teach? In our initial discussion of these questions, we’ll draw on the Composition website (composition.gmu.edu), your own college writing experiences, and your mentor/mentee and tutoring experiences.
Note:
Since many of you will miss the second week of class when you go
to AWP, we’ll hold this class at least partially on Townhall. Those not
going to AWP may choose to meet for our regular class rather than doing
a peer
review of the initial teaching statement online. We’ll decide in class
how
we want to handle this.
Week Two, January 31: “Just when I’ve designed the right syllabus, the wrong students walk in the door”-- Sharon Crowley. How does the complex chemistry among the teacher and students help shape the classroom dynamic? Our focus this week is on classroom: the teacher, the students, and classroom management. Read: StM: Chapters 1-3. TC: Skorczewski, p.99; Bean Chapter 3; in PDF (sent in an email), chapter four from Engaged Writers and Dynamic Disciplines: “Students Talk about Expectations, Confidence, and How They Learn.” Also look at syllabi template on comp website. Write: First draft of teaching philosophy, which should reflect your preliminary thinking about teaching fyc based on your own preferences and experiences, our first week discussion, and the assigned readings on teachers and students. Note 1: Those of you missing class will need to turn in your teaching philosophy draft to me in hard copy before you leave and also give either hard or soft copies to two of your AWP peers for review. Before our Feb 7 class meeting, you should give me a 2-3 page description of and reflection on the peer review process, whether it occurred online or by circulating hard copies. Note 2: If we decide to hold the whole class on Townhall rather than face-to-face, everyone will need to follow the process I describe in Note 1.
Week Three, February 7: Louise Phelps on the Practice/Theory/Practice arc: “The relationship between theory and practice at any point is not a simple one-way influence, but a dialect. Theoretical ideas filter into practice and are in turn affected by it. …at some depth, theory (explicit formulations of deep structures) acquires the power to counter strong tacit assumptions with new conceptions.” This week focuses on some of the history, major theories, and research that have guided the teaching of composition. How do these theories help account for your ideas about good writing, why we need required freshman composition, and what should be taught in 101. Read: TC: Slevin, p. 59, Elbow, p. 172; StM: Bartholomae, p. 382 (review), Herzberg, p 441; on JSTOR: “Personal Writing Assignments” by Robert Connors (CCC May 1987) and sent as PDF “Composition at the Turn of the 21st Century” by Richard Fulkerson. Write: Teaching log entry (see explanation above). Written summary on article assigned to you for peer group activity. Also due: Topic (or list of ideas) for teaching demo and three preferred dates.
Week Four, February 14: This
week we focus on writing processes--invention,
arrangement, style, and revision—and the rhetorical contexts and
motives
that shape writing.. James Britton’s three part
writing model: expressive discourse: writing to
discover and explore; transactional—writing to get
“things” done; poetic: writing
as art. Consider your writing process and how it changes based on your
purpose
and intended audience. T Read: TC:
Perl, p. 140, Rose, 148, Sommers, 195; Bean,
chapter 6, and StM: Review Chapters 6, 7, 8. Write: In
teaching
log, write your thoughts on these readings and what they mean to you as
a
writing teacher-in-training. Review 3 sample syllabi on the Composition
website,
and write 2-3 pages of “thinking-out-loud” about elements
you want to build into your 101 course. Note:
We’ll take some time to look at textbooks and discuss the
theoretical
and rhetorical frames that seem to have informed the authors’ choices.
Part II: The
Actions. How
and what to teach
Week Five, February 21: Critical thinking: What is it and how is it connected to writing? We’ll begin with Bean’s discussion in Chapter One in which he quotes J. Kurfiss’s definition: [Critical thinking] is an investigation whose purpose is to explore a situation, phenomenon, question, or problem to arrive at a hypothesis or conclusion about it that integrates all available information and that can therefore be convincingly justified” (qtd in Bean 3). From there we’ll look at the critical thinking rubrics developed by Mason’s Office of Institutional Assessment available at: http://assessment.gmu.edu/StudentLearningCompetencies/Critical/Standards.html. To consider as you read Bean and Leki: Does one definition fit all students? Read: Bean chapters 1, 2, 7, 9, and pp 176-81. StM: Leki, p. 330. Write: Develop a list of four or more writing activities that you think you’d like to use to encourage critical thinking approaches in your class. Also attach a draft of the first page of your syllabus with preliminary course description and nuts and bolts info.
Teaching demos begin! We’ll do two a week until
everyone has done a presentation. Your outline, goals, and rationale
are due
the week before you present and post-writing is due the week after.
Week Six,
February 28:
Week Seven,
March 6: Teaching research: This week
we’ll focus on what students need to learn about searching for sources;
noting, citing, and documenting what they find, writing from and about
sources,
and avoiding plagiarism. We’ll spend some time on the Mason Libraries
site and talk about ways to break the research project up into
manageable
steps. We’ll hear from guest presenter Anna Habib about the research
assignment sequence she designed and how she’s adapted that process to
make it work in English 302 with Devil’s
Highway. Read: Bean, chapter
12; StM: Chapter 9. Write: In teaching log, some ideas
for how
you’ll teach research skills and sequence your assignments. .
Week Eight: Spring Break: March 10-16. Be
sure to hear bell hooks speak on March 17,
time and place TBA.
Week Nine, March 20: Multiple literacies and digital rhetorics. Guest speaker Sarah Baker will describe a WIKI project she has used in 101 and the website usability assignment she gives early in her course. gital rhetorics. Read: StM: Chapter 10 and Selfe p. 479; TC: Krause, p. 325 and Purdy, p. 305. Write: Draft of syllabus thus far with explanation of how you’ll incorporate technology, noting readings, other sources of information, and/or experiences that have influenced your choices. Note: You need to build a week in computer room into your syllabus, but you are not required to give new media assignments.
Part
Three. The act: Designing Writing Assignments. Responding to
Writers and Writing, Grading Papers
Week Ten, March 27: Designing and sequencing assignments. Where does grammar fit in?. Read: StM: Chapter 4; Bean Chapters 4 and 5. Write: 2-3 pages on the textbook(s) you’ve chosen. Why did you choose it? How does it facilitate/make possible the kinds of assignments you want to give? Turn in draft of an assignment that you have developed.
Note: I will miss class on
April 3, as I’ll be attending the 4Cs convention. We’ll decide
together how to structure the Week Eleven class, which is focused on
peer
review, managing groups, and collaborative writing. You may decide to
meet in
class without me to discuss the readings and do peer review or to meet
online.
.
Week Eleven,
April 3: Peer
review and managing groups: As Wendy Bishop points out in “Helping Peer
Groups Succeed,” the literature on peer writing groups and the
effectiveness of peer review often over-rates the results and
oversimplifies
the process. This week focuses on strategies for organizing and
managing peer
groups and the peer review process so that peer commentary will be
meaningful
for your students and you’ll see the results in their revised
drafts. To practice what we preach,
you’ll exchange drafts of your revised teaching statement to elicit
three
different kinds of commentary—open-ended, teacher-directed,
writer-directed. Read: StM: Bishop 343 and pages 69-74;
Bean Chapter
9; and Tips on Peer Groups: http://www.english.udel.edu/wc/faculty/tipsheets/peerReview.pdf.
Note: By now
should have
observed a 101 or 302 class and given me your observation write-up.
Week
Twelve, April 10: Responding to writers and grading their
work. We all want our students to succeed as writers in our classes, so
sometimes we (me included) given them lots of feedback on drafts,
engaging with
their ideas and making suggestions for how to revise the next draft.
But what
kinds of feedback are most effective and how much time should you spend
on each
paper? In the end, what’s a fair grade for a paper whether the student
has been assiduously following our suggestions or not? These questions
are the
focus of this week’s discussion; there are no pre-determined answers,
only recommended practices and your own experiences as tutors and
students to
draw on. Read: StM: Chapter 5
and Sommers, p. 352; Bean
Chapter 13 and 14; and “Minimal
Marking” by Richard Haswell at http://www.english.vt.edu/~grammar/grammarforteachers/readings/haswell.html.
Write: Create a grading rubric for
the assignment you’ve designed. And
a draft of Teaching Tip sheet for peer review. We’ll also work
together to create a grading rubric for this assignment.
Week
Thirteen, April 17: Evaluating and grading—the least
enjoyable part of teaching. As a writing teacher, I want to be
interested in
and enjoy reading my students’ writing. In fact, that’s generally
one of the criteria I make sure to include for every assignment, and I
try not
to give assignments that won’t engage me as a reader. I also enjoy
coaching writers and seeing them develop. Knowing that I have to grade
the
“paper” (why do we call our students’ writing
“papers”?) takes away much of the pleasure. In “Embracing
Contraries in the Teaching Process,” Peter Elbow writes about the
conflict we experience in the roles of coach and gatekeeper. How will
you
balance those roles? Read: Bean
Chapter 15. TC: Elbow, p. 387. Write: In
teaching log, consider how
you will approach the issue of correctness. How “good” does a
student’s writing have to be? How will you measure “good”? Teaching
Tip sheet due.
Part IV:
Praxis and
Reflection—The syllabus as a reflection of your teaching philosophy.
The
other stakeholders. Reflection as integral part of process.
Week Fourteen, April 24: Outcomes for first year composition: How will you syllabus help students achieve these outcomes? How do your syllabus and textbook reflect your theories and philosophy of teaching comp. How will you determine who passes and who fails? How would you explain your grading decisions to other stakeholders, i.e. teachers who assign writing across the disciplines and have high expectations (generally unrealistic) for the writing abilities students will possess after taking 101? Or to external audiences who are alarmed about the “literacy crisis” we face and are putting pressure on institutions to account for students’ competency as writers and critical thinkers? What is to be done about “grammar” and correctness? Whose writing seems to invoke the most alarm? Read: StM: Rose, p. 397. Review outcomes statement for English 101 on the Composition website and on the Writing Program Administrator’s website at: http://www.wpacouncil.org/positions/outcomes.html. Write: Nearly final draft of syllabus due for peer review.
Week Fifteen, May 1: Your syllabus, your textbook(s), and how both speak to your philosophy of teaching first year composition. Due: Syllabus to share with class. In an informal presentation to the class, you’ll describe and give a rationale for the choices you’ve made in creating your syllabus and selecting your textbook(s). You’ll also bring the next-to-final draft of your teaching statement for peer review and response. .
Exam Day, May
8: Teaching
portfolio due with reflection on the course and portfolio contents. Note: I’ll entertain requests for
extensions until May 12, the last day of the exam period.