Unit Choice for 709

I think I will plan out either the first unit or the fourth unit.

With Unit 1, I would flesh out the narrative essay and the connections I would try to draw to the work we would do later in the course. If I planned Unit 1, I could work on creating the tone/orientation of the course.

However, I think I may want to do the fourth unit, perhaps even the final unit, since I could incorporate more developed ideas into it... I'm leaning towards one of these later units now that I am thinking about it. Let's see how I feel tomorrow... I'm glad I don't have to make any decisions yet!

Course Description

From last week, the rough course description I wrote:

In this course, we will examine many genres and formats of text media. From newspapers to YouTube videos, academic journals to opinion pieces, novels to short stories, even advertisements to petitions, we will read and analyze text to uncover the similarities, differences, and underlying ideologies within each. With each reading, you will be expected to complete some form of writing, from free-writes to brainstorms to formal compositions. Expect to engage critically with the readings. Come prepared to discuss ideas in class. Be willing to rethink your position and be ready to argue your case using textual evidence. This class is aimed at preparing you to take on the rigors of college-level coursework: you are expected to regularly attend class, come prepared, and maintain academic honesty in your compositions.

I think that when I re-write this, I want to strive for a less serious tone. I enjoyed Laura's course description from last week because it was very approachable. I still like this initial draft for outlining the standards/expectations I would have for students. I do not know if I will include graphics, perhaps if they are relevant... I will definitely take care when formatting the syllabus--I think that clear layout and organization can allow students to feel comfortable with a course by setting a positive and transparent tone. A well-organized syllabus avoids confusion.

Course Overview: Agency

Unit 1: Narrative Essay

• A descriptive, narrative essay about a choice you made or a choice that was made for you, and how this positively or negatively affected you.

Unit 2: Socio-cultural, Personal Observation Study

• Picking a context to observe the various communications people use within it--the context should contain at least two modes of communication. (Examples: In a doctors office there is both doctor-to-doctor and doctor-to-patient communication. In a school setting, how students communicate outside of the classroom before/after class compared to the language used within the class.) Note if certain types of language use provide the speaker with authority. 

Unit 3: Persuasive Essay

•  Persuading students to use a certain type of language in a context of choice. Include reasons why the readers would want to use the specialized language or specific dialect (for example, to become members or communicate clearly). 

Unit 4: Expository Essay

• Student chosen topic, guided by the teacher. Should connect to the course theme of agency. 

Unit 5: Research Paper

• With the option to use the same topic from their persuasive essays or to pick a new one, students will be asked to perform independent research outside of class to incorporate into their papers. 

Prioritizing SFSU Learning objectives

I prioritize active reading and bumped up the third learning objective of "reflection" to the second spot. As we read and then write on texts, I believe reflecting on how we understand them allows SFSU's second goal of competence in using the writing process and collaboration with peers. Reflection fosters awareness in one's own writing and allows us to contribute a critical and thoughtful eye to our peers' papers. The more mechanical, syntactical goals, while important, are listed towards the bottom of my list. While I believe in their importance, I think that using generative grammar instruction aligns with my prioritizing of active reading/critical thinking. 

Here are the SFSU goals listed with their original numbers, but in the order I would prioritize them (I changed this a bit from my previous blog):

1. Read actively and effectively and use information acquired from readings, research and other sources critically in their own writing.

3. Reflect on their reading and writing processes as an avenue to achieving greater control of these processes and increased effectiveness as readers and writers.

2. Use writing processes and strategies for generating, revising, editing, and proofreading their work; collaborate with others during the writing process, developing ways to offer constructive criticism and accept the criticism of others.

8. Grain and use knowledge of the academic community to support their development as learners, readers and writers.

6. Use evidence and analysis to successfully support the central purpose of their writing; demonstrate ethical conduct in their writing and the appropriate use and citation of the works of others;

4. Demonstrate a basic familiarity with rhetorical conventions, composing effective expository prose with regard to purpose, audience and genre.

5. Create and apply a research plan to locate, use and evaluate information from a variety of sources, including library resources.

7. Develop knowledge of genre conventions ranging from structure and paragraphing to tone and mechanics; control such surface features as syntax, grammar, punctuation, and spelling;

Fleshed out teaching philosophy

Social-Metacognitivism

My teaching philosophy is a blend of all three major pedagogical approaches: cognitivism, expressivism, and socio-culturalism. I lean more towards a blending of sociocultural discursive activities within socially constructed schematic practices. I would incorporate expressivist activities within pre-writing and pre-reading activities, encouraging personal thinking and activation of schemata. Students’ initial, individual responses would fuel classroom discussions that draw on student’s prior knowledge and cultural capital. Reading of various formats and genres will be central to classroom culture, integral to classroom activities, and vital for personal development.

In my class, I would like to foster a community that socially and culturally examines ideologies as the means for critical thinking: critical thinking that leads to metacognitivist composition processes. After expressivist pre-reading and writing activities and socio-cultural class discussions, students would begin composing through a varied, meta-cognitivist writing process.  Using multiple methods for brainstorming, organizing, writing, and revising, students are encouraged to examine their reading and writing techniques. Ideally, by building awareness of their thinking and writing processes, students would gain greater confidence in their compositions, build up their sense of academic authority, and feel comfortable as they join their chosen academic discourse communities.

As a teacher, my goal is to create a community of students who actively engage in reading traditional texts and their worlds, socially construct knowledge through participating in class discussions, and clearly communicate critical analysis of content using varied, individualized writing processes.

Writing Prompt

An Exploration of the Expository Essay

By now, we have examined various text genres and the influences that both shape the text and transmit messages through these mediums. You will select your own text and topic, composing an expository essay using three secondary sources.

Part One: Pre-writing. 

Pick an article, advertisement, short story, opinion piece, blog post or another approved medium. Begin by spending time actively, critically reading your chosen piece, taking notes, posing questions, and evaluating the author's purpose and intended audience. Then, do a timed, ten minute free-write, brainstorm, or outline.

Due______________.

Part Two: Collaboration, Critique and Composition

Bring your pre-writing assignment to class. We will discuss in small groups and I will conference individually. Be prepared to explain what drew you to the text, the major concerns you will consider including in your composition, and what (or where) your sources will be. The goal of this activity is to provide a sounding board for your classmates. Remember, the better you listen and discuss, the more insightful and helpful the activity may be when it is time for you to write.

Due______________.

Part Three: Research and Writing

After our class visit to the library, finish gathering your sources and write your draft. Bring a completed first draft in MLA format to class. We will collaborate as partners and in small groups to workshop your drafts.

Due______________.

Part Four: Revision and Reflection

Finish revising your draft based on peer and teacher feedback. Once you feel that your essay has been revised, make sure to edit the sentence-level issues (grammar and spelling). Write a reflective response to the writing process, discussing any struggles, concerns, insights you may have come across during the composition process.

The Final Draft, including all parts of this prompt, are due on______________.

Course Description

In this course, we will examine many genres and formats of text media. From newspapers to YouTube videos, academic journals to opinion pieces, novels to short stories, even advertisements to petitions, we will read and analyze text to uncover the similarities, differences, and underlying ideologies within each. With each reading, you will be expected to complete some form of writing, from free-writes to brainstorms to formal compositions. Expect to engage critically with the readings. Come prepared to discuss ideas in class. Be willing to rethink your position and be ready to argue your case using textual evidence. This class is aimed at preparing you to take on the rigors of college-level coursework: you are expected to regularly attend class, come prepared, and maintain academic honesty in your compositions.

Course Overview

What students will be doing:

• Actively reading multiple text medias, analyzing for ideologies of both social and personal significance. 
• Discussing through personal writing, in small groups, and as a class.
• Writing formal expository, persuasive, narrative and research compositions.

Skills to focus on:

• Active/Rhetorical Reading Strategies
• Annotations
• Question-generation (what questions to ask yourself and others when reading a text and discussing it)
• Pre-writing strategies
• The many forms of the writing process
• Organizing ideas
• Revising
• Editing/Proof-reading

Tensions Between My Teaching Philosophy and SFSU's Learning Objectives

How I formatted my "teaching philosophy" mostly aligns with SFSU's Learning Objectives. If anything, I think there would be tension between what goals I prioritize.

Here are the SFSU goals listed with their original numbers, but in the order I would prioritize them:

1. Read actively and effectively and use information acquired from readings, research and other sources critically in their own writing.

3. Reflect on their reading and writing processes as an avenue to achieving greater control of these processes and increased effectiveness as readers and writers.

8. Grain and use knowledge of the academic community to support their development as learners, readers and writers.

2. Use writing processes and strategies for generating, revising, editing, and proofreading their work; collaborate with others during the writing process, developing ways to offer constructive criticism and accept the criticism of others.

6. Use evidence and analysis to successfully support the central purpose of their writing; demonstrate ethical conduct in their writing and the appropriate use and citation of the works of others;

4. Demonstrate a basic familiarity with rhetorical conventions, composing effective expository prose with regard to purpose, audience and genre.

5. Create and apply a research plan to locate, use and evaluate information from a variety of sources, including library resources.

7. Develop knowledge of genre conventions ranging from structure and paragraphing to tone and mechanics; control such surface features as syntax, grammar, punctuation, and spelling;

• Number one remains the same, since I believe that active reading creates critical thinkers who can write critically and analytically. 
• I bumped up number three, since I believe metacognitive self-awareness may greatly increase students buy-in to schooling as well as support them in their educational endeavors. 
• Both DoC and FAC influenced the repositioning of number 8 into the number three position, where constructing an academic community that introduces students into the larger college community becomes a main goal within the composition classroom. 

I notice, now, that I moved most of the mechanical aspects to the second half of the list. I still value these goals. (From my middle school teaching experience, I have seen how helpful grammatical and structural instruction is.) However, there is an inherent tension between my teaching philosophy (and probably many teacher's philosophies) and explicit grammatical instruction, in that without it, students cannot completely engage in the academic community.

Teaching rhetorical, critical, and analytical thinking, reading, and writing is the only way to truly introduce students to academia. The tension lies in the balance between the meta-objectives and the essay-level objectives.

Teaching philosophy

Social-metacognitivist

My teaching philosophy is a blend of all three major pedagogical approaches: cognitivism, expressivism, and socio-culturalism. I lean more towards a blending of sociocultural discursive activities within socially constructed schematic practices. I like the idea of expressivist activities for pre-writing/reading personal thinking. I would like to translate those initial, individual responses into social discussions that draw on students prior knowledge and cultural capital. Reading of various formats and genres will be central to classroom culture, integral to classroom activities, and vital for personal development.

In my class, I would like to foster a community that socially and culturally examines ideologies as the means for critical thinking: critical thinking that leads to metacognitivist composition processes.

Blogs 1-8, Using Amy Tan's "Mother Tongue"

The Traditional Remedial Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: This teacher would probably not provide any pre- or active reading activities or assignments. Rather, Tan's text would be a piece of assigned reading students were to do outside of class along with their grammar homework.
• Possible Writing Assignments: Perhaps the teacher would use Tan's article to discuss grammar form, such as the frequent use of adjective clauses (i.e. "...the English I spoke to my mother, which for lack of a better term might be described as 'simple'; the English she used with me, which for lack of a better term might be described as 'broken'; my translation of her Chinese, which could certainly be described as 'watered down'..." Or, the teacher might even discuss Tan's proper punctuation when using hyphens. I think it highly unlikely that this text would be a source for student writing since it does not fall neatly into his narrative, descriptive, definition, comparison/contrast genres of paragraphs and essays. If it was used, it may be in conjunction with the comparison/contrast essay.
• Structure of the Writing Process: "1. Here's the topic/prompt 2. It's due ____"
• Evaluating the Writing: Evaluation of student writing would focus on students' grammar and whether they correctly formatted the paper. The teacher would also judge the organization of ideas, clarity of topic sentences, overall cohesion of the paper, and whether the ideas discussed were "correct."

SFSU IRW Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: In class, the teacher might introduce the article through an introductory activity that asks students to brainstorm and/or share all the "Englishes" they use in varying contexts: home, school, and social interactions. The teacher might then provide some active reading strategies: requiring students to take notes or write down any questions they have while reading. The teacher may then assign post-reading questions or a journal/blog response where the students can further think about the article through writing about it, and then sharing it with their classmates (their academic discourse community). 
• Possible Writing Assignments: Besides the journal/blog response, the teacher might assign a similar writing response on the topic of how students' different "Englishes" impact their experiences in school (a narrative essay). 
• Structure of the Writing Process: Time would be given to students to turn in multiple drafts and receive peer and teacher feedback, as a way to include them in the formation of the classroom's academic discourse community. 
• Evaluating the Writing: Attention would be given to the extent of students' drafting, synthesizing of ideas, stating purposes, along with students' clarity, complexity, and sophistication in attempted communication. 

Discovery of Competence Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: A teacher might begin by asking students to share their socio-culturally influenced language experiences both inside and outside of the classroom. Students would be introduced to active reading strategies. After reading, students would compose their own questions and concerns about the reading to discuss in class, and perhaps research later.
• Possible Writing Assignments: This teacher might ask students to observe themselves or other people to see how language changes depending on different situations and contexts. Then, students would have time to draft and report their findings into a formal essay that uses Tan's article to frame their ideas (purposeful communication of listening to language and writing about it). 
• Structure of the Writing Process: Students would be asked to spend time researching and observing their chosen subjects and contextual situations. After reporting their findings to the class in small groups, the students would use feedback from peers (the discourse community) to aid their drafting process. Through communication about their writing from teachers responding as readers (asking questions about the students' research) and from peer dialogue, students would revise their papers. 
• Evaluating the Writing: The teacher would try to respond to students drafts in a meaningful manner, so that the final evaluation would stem from an extended dialogue with the student about their writing. The essay, with all its drafts and responses, would be included in the final portfolio students create in this course. 

Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: Students would read the article outside of class, marking interesting or challenging sections with a small check as they read. After reading, students would spend 20 minutes continuously writing a journal response. In the next class, they would have a worksheet to complete that would aid their small-group discussions. 
• Possible Writing Assignments: The two teachers would assign a narrative essay about students' adolescent experiences with various "Englishes," asking students to identify how different dialects have informed their personal identity and perhaps create new terms to describe or discuss these dialects/Englishes.
• Structure of the Writing Process: The students would turn in a first draft and share it with peers, so the class could provide feedback. Also, one of the teachers would read and respond to the students draft, asking questions that prompt further critical thinking and revising of the paper. 
• Evaluating the Writing: After reading drafts and the "final" papers of students, teachers would respond with further helpful remarks, so that the students can edit this paper up to the point that it is turned into a class anthology of all the students' work that becomes a classroom text. 

Cognitivist Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: The teacher might provide background information about Amy Tan, discussing her novels and literary career. Also, there may be in-class activities that encourage students to access the proper schema for reading her article. 
• Possible Writing Assignments: Students might be asked reading comprehension questions that demonstrate they have accurately understood Tan's meanings. A more progressivist, culturally-influenced teacher might include assignments that ask students to consider the cultural influences and ideologies that impacted Tan's understanding of language, then turning to analyze their own use of "Englishes"
• Structure of the Writing Process: Brainstorming (based on proper schema), drafting, editing, and turning in a final paper. 
• Evaluating the Writing: Students would be judged on their proper comprehension of what Tan is communicating in this article. Or, a progressive teacher would grade based on how students analyze Tan's experience  and relate it to how they understand their own lives and languages. 

Expressivist Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: Asking students about their previous experiences with language/dialects. Active reading focused on how the reader does or does not relate on a personal level to Tan's article.
• Possible Writing Assignments: A personal response to or criticism of Tan's article, saying wether the student did or did not like it and why. Also, perhaps the teacher would assign a personal literacy narrative focused on the types of language the student encounters (but one that does not necessarily have to refer to Tan's article).
• Structure of the Writing Process: Personal choice in using different types of brainstorming, outlining, structure, etc. All students are capable of language, so not much focus is paid to exposing students to formal writing strategies.
• Evaluating the Writing: Whether the student is personally responding, how the students shows their agency through a close-reading of Tan's article, or how students use the article to explore their own understanding of language.

Socio-cultural Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: Pre-reading activities and information about historical and social factors that influenced Amy Tan's writings. Actively reading to discover the different ideologies and institutions that inform Tan's perspective. Post-reading questioning of these ideologies and whether she has accurately (from the student's contextual perspectives) identified the influences of them on her understanding of language.
• Possible Writing Assignments: Asking students to further develop Tan's ideas about the difference between home and school "Englishes" through historical, cultural, and sociological lenses. 
• Structure of the Writing Process: Brainstorming through class discussions (within their discourse community) that incorporate students' outside experiences with language. Bringing drafts in to class, where classmates will read, respond, and perhaps challenge or further the ideas of peers. 
• Evaluating the Writing: Good writing is seen as furthering personal understanding, constructing knowledge, and incorporating analysis of social, cultural, and historical influences (both in Tan's writing and from the students' own educational experiences). 

McCormick-Influenced Teacher

• Pre-Reading, Active Reading, and/or Post-Reading Activities: Pre-reading discussions activate various schematic categories students might consider as they read Tan's article, including socio-cultural, historical, and institutional influences. Students would actively read for personal understanding, a connection to their own literacies, and to recognize the ideological influences on and within Tan's article. Post-reading discussions might inquire how students have interpreted her text, how the text can be "in-use" in their writing about their own literacies, and how different perspectives of reading may change the interpretation of this text.
• Possible Writing Assignments: Analyzing Tan's understanding of literacy and language through a socio-historical, culturally-influenced ideological lens as a means of discussing their own experiences within the education system. 
• Structure of the Writing Process: Brainstorming through discussions about the influences on texts and our readings of them, drafting that incorporates metacognitive awareness of oneself as a contextualized reader.
• Evaluating the Writing: Focus on how students analyze socio-cultural factors within the text and their writing to aid metacognition of ideologies. 

McCormick Chapter 4

"Reading to Write: the cultural imperatives underlying cognitive acts"

In chapter 4, McCormick discusses a study that explores student's perceptions and processes about writing, using the topic of time management. McCormick writes from a perspective concerned with metacognition and how awareness (or obliviousness) of cultural and ideological influences affects student writing. She identifies three major concerns students have that limit their compositions:

• Closure
• Objectivity
• Contradiction

She notes that students often confuse the end "product" of an essay with the writing process, where the student assumed goals of essay final drafts must be cohesive and have a sense of "closure," written from an "objective" perspective, and free from contradictions. 

McCormick discusses the problems with these common assumptions of students, suggesting ways to reframe student understanding:

Closure

• The false goal of "closure" creates in students the need to rid their writing of contradiction in favor of cohesiveness. 
• This model limits students' learning through the composition process (writing to think). Moreover, it is not representative of the true model of academic discourse.
• Students must be taught to write in drafts and stages, so that their writing is exploratory, not limited by a premature focus on closure.

Objectivity

• We live in a society that values the individual--so the individual voice must be allowed to enter the essay. 
• Not allowing first person in essays "decenters" students
• Writing that attempts to use an "objective" voice, is really adopting ideas from other authors and sources that have inherent ideologies. 
• Students must learn to write with their own sense of authority, we must teach students to speak for themselves and analyze the ideologies of institutions. 
• Metacognition of the historical and ideological influences on education is important for developing student writers.

Contradiction

• McCormick proposes using the theme of "tentativeness" in the composition process as a means for exploring ideas, allowing for critical thinking at every stage of writing.
• She discusses the ideological forces that encourage summarizing in some subjects and situations, allowing students to take the safe route of repeating information, rather than rethinking the information in relation to their individual understandings. 
• She proposes that contradictions in writing are a good sign, because they show thought and allow students to grapple with ideological arguments. 

Combining cognitivism and cultural models of reading and writing allows us to understand that students must develop metacognitive awareness of cultural ideologies that impact their assumptions about and participation in the writing processes. 

Bonus Blog on Literacy!

My high school English teacher shared this transcription of Niel Gaiman's speech for the Reading Agency.

In his speech he talks about the importance of reading as building creative thinkers through imagination, escapism and empathy. Gaiman eloquently argues for the basic concept we continue to discover in our readings and discussions: that literacy is agency.

For library lovers, Gaiman speaks for the preservation of libraries, pointing out their purpose in providing an integral, information-filled space that fosters social equity. 

I think that when I design my course, I would like to incorporate the library. Not simply visiting the library for research purposes, but hosting study groups and reading hours. Libraries can be liberating, magical spaces for creating communities. Students who may have never spent time in a library may focus better in an environment where all people are publicly pursuing knowledge, information, and perhaps even escape.

Cognitivsm in the Classroom

Possible Cognitivst Pedagogical Practices

Cognivist theory sees learning to read and write as a process, one to be approached with a specific skill set. Cognivist pedagogies would have teachers "activating" student schema before reading and writing assignments:

• Teachers may give lectures on background information to activate the "appropriate" schemata. 
• Teachers might lay out specific readings in an order that increasingly builds up student schemata and increases their understanding (easy readings before more challenging texts).
• Students might be asked to hypothesize about a text before, during, and after their reading: demonstrating how their hypothesis changed, and when their inferences are either reinforced or revised during reading.

If the cognitivst theories are combined with a socio-cultural understanding of student difference, pedagogical practices may consist of:

• Building on student background knowledge before beginning a reading (incorporating their diverse experiences to inform the reading).
• Brainstorming possible interpretations during and after reading a text, based on students inferences. 
• Holding group discussions about the meaning of a text, seeing how different groups of students have interpreted a text and allowing that to further construct classroom meaning. 

Cognitivsm and the Discovery of Facts

Cognivist theories would fit with some (not all) of the activities within the books The Discovery of Competence and Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts. 

In DOC, cognitivst theories are at work in the tent pole idea that all students arrive in the composition classroom already "competent," or full of schema to activate. The major difference between cognitivsm and DOC pedagogical practice is the socio-cultural factor. DOC is majorly influenced by socio-cultural theories: student schema are activated through academic discourse communities, not seen as something the teacher or text activates.

In FAC, the course theme relies on students' personal backgrounds and autobiographies as a source for theorizing and analyzing adolescent theories. The course activates students shemata in order for them to better understand and interpret the course readings. 

A major difference lies in their more expressivist modes of understanding, using personal autobiography as a tool in understanding adolescent theory, waiting until mid-course to bring in actual academic articles and theories. A more cognitive-based approach may have them introducing those texts sooner. 

Cognitivism

The Human Brain as a Computer Processor

In the composition field, cognitivst theories and research functions with the underlying assumption that the human brain interprets outside information just like a computer processes data. Cognitive science views all human processes as necessarily quantifiable and, therefore, researchable. This research focuses on how students are similar to computers in their processing of information. Consequently, composition studies and reading comprehension are thought of as composition and reading skills. Occasionally, cognitivism then leads to a banking-system model in the classroom. However, cognitivism also suggests that learning literacy can be a "problem-solving process" and also a socio-culturally influenced event through the idea of schemata. 

Schema Theory

As an increasingly influential component of cognitive theory, shema theory posits that literacy is due in great part to both the prior knowledge of readers and whether they are "active readers." In order to actively read a text, students are seen as interpreting and constructing meaning from texts using their background knowledge, otherwise known as their schemata. 

Schema theory creates a correlation between cognitive theory and sociocultural theories; yet, they differ in their idea of absolutes. Cultural theories believe there are no universal ways of knowing, but cognitive/schema theory believes that human understanding is quantifiable. (Cognitivsm is criticized of oversimplification of schema, not allowing for the diversity of people and experiences in their defining of schema.) 

With the goal of knowing through schema, cognivist theory and research defines schema as abstract, mental constructions that enable people to both understand and make inferences about the world. In order to create meaning, people create relationships between schemata and a text, inferring meaning and interpreting knowledge. As active readers encounter texts (or the world), they constantly make hypothesis and revise hypothesis as a way to interpret and construct meaning. 

Important Players

McCormick points out that, "The study and teaching of cognivist processes involved in reading has produced a huge research industry. As Dykstra notes, there are over 1,000 articles published per year (quoted in Willinsky, 160)..." She names and discusses the theories and research of a few key cognivists in her book, The Culture of Reading and the Teaching of English:

• H. Gardner
• Just and Capenter
• Flower and Hayes
• Anderson
• Sir Frederic Bartlett
• Crawford and Chaffin
• Bransford and Johnson
• Back and McKeown

Reactions to McCormick

The Culture of Reading and the Teaching of English

Kathleen McCormick's philosophy is that the three major divisions of reading and composition theory do not and should not exist separately from one another. Instead, she suggests that we view cognitivism, expressivisim, and socio-culturalism in a "dialectical relationship." Of all the IRW and Remedial Course models we have studied so far this semester, McCormick's model appeals to me the most. We teach diverse students, so why would we limit our pedagogical approaches to one theory?

I believe that we should consider all three theories as pieces that work together to build a stronger, more inclusive pedagogy for teaching reading and writing. From the present perspective, I realize it is all too easy to look back at the development of compostion and reading theory as logically leading to this point in history, from cognitivism, to expressivism, to socio-culturalism, to a mix of all.

I also enjoy McCormick's focus on reading. I believe that the best scholarly (and real-world) writing occurs after active reading, critical thinking, and discussion. 

Grammar

None of the reading and writing courses we have studied so far have emphasized explicit grammar instruction. I think their focus on active reading and the writing process is admirable, but idealistic. The courses imply that the grammar competency will simply come naturally with the students continued learning. But, I think students need some practical grammar instruction on big, basic issues they encounter in their writing.

I would add a few grammar workshops to the course, maybe a 20 minute session every week or two-weeks, and I would have the students determine what type of grammar instruction would be most useful to discuss.

Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts: "Writing, Reading and Authority"

Chapter 4: A Case Study of John

In this chapter, Susan V. Wall analyzes a case study of a student who took Bartholomae and Petrosky's reading and writing course on adolescent development. Through conversations with the student and excerpts from a few of his essays, Wall demonstrates how Bartholomae and Petrosky's course allows John to develop as a writer while discussing some of the challenges John encountered.

Initial Struggles

• John struggled with finding a balance between formal writing discourse and saying something meaningful.
• In previous English courses, John had not experienced meaningful discourse with his teachers about his writing, sometimes receiving no feedback at all.
• His previous attempts to redefine his personal identity had failed in high school, but this Beginning Reading and Writing course finally provided a support system for his personal growth. 

Classroom Progress

• With the BRW topic of adolescent development, John was asked to define his sense of self using stories and examples from his own adolescence. 
• Wall points out that this redefining of self is necessarily different from his previous attempts because it is through the act of reading and writing
• Writing about his life from a distanced perspective allowed John to begin developing a "literary persona" that enabled him to view his work as a more critically aware writer. 
• John began re-reading his own work as a stepping stone to meaningful revision, developing an increasing ability to identify the thematic purposes and patterns in his own essays. 
• His teachers comments encouraged John to define his terms (his "dialectical terms" that require an opposing term to clarify their meaning).

Not Quite There Yet...

• John was not writing in what others would consider "academic language" by the end of the course. But he was moving towards that through his increasing ability to define terms and revise.
• Wall identifies the important step John takes in revising as a means for understanding.
• The teachers of John's BRW course moved forward an academic reading meant for after the completion of student autobiographies. This may have hindered John's own sense of developing authority as he was asked to replace the terms he had defined in his writing with terms of academic authors (official "authority")
• John's reading problems (his inability to connect fully with texts or return to them for clarification) hindered his writing progress.

Authority After All

• When Wall interviewed John two years later, he had taken another composition course and passed with a B+
• John had finished the journey he began in the BRW course by truly connecting the reading he did with the writing the course required. Integrating reading and writing towards his own interpretation of academia, allowing him to function with authority as a student. 

Self-Assessment of Blog Posts

In my previous blog post, I stated that an "A" blog:

1. Shows understanding of and engagement with reading by connecting it to own knowledge, constructing new meaning/interpretations/questions
2. Poses own question about the reading and tries to answer it, hopefully encouraging further discussion 
3. Synthesizes multiple readings when appropriate/necessary
4. Posts may make connections to previous blog posts and current posts from other students/interacts with other posts
5. Incorporates images or other forms of media when necessary
6. Appropriate register/tone / appropriate blog language / individual voice (not formal or academic, yet thoughtful and coherent)
7. Includes useful links or resources to other readings when appropriate 

However, I think I would like to unpack this rubric a little, based on my self-assessment of my 704 blog. The blog posts that are most useful to me in the 709 course are those that ask me to synthesize information--either through summary or mapping--and they are also the blog posts I find most challenging. I enjoy the blog I have for 704 more, since those posts easily draw on my experiences. I realize that the 709 blog posts are more challenging, for me, because they are based on practical conceptualization of theoretical ideas. I think, as a blogger, I am stronger when I am connecting theories with my own practical experiences. 

My advice to myself is to find ways of bridging the theories we talk about into the practical application asked for in blog posts.

I think, then I will change my rubric...

5 major concerns for blog posts:

1. Shows understanding of and engagement with reading by connecting it to own knowledge
2. Constructs new meaning, provides interpretations, or asks questions
3. Synthesizes multiple readings when appropriate
4. Incorporates images or other forms of media (whenever possible)
5. Using an individual voice (not formal or academic, yet thoughtful and coherent) 

With this, I hope to improve my personal connection to the theories (that I do enjoy, just struggle with translating into practical terms) and create new meaning through these blog posts.

Course Charting in Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts

Week One

• Introduction to class expectations: 6 required reading books, 4 self-chosen books, and weekly journal writing, along with formal writing assignments. 
• Begin by discussing the course topic, "Growth and Change in Adolescence" and going over the work towards it (journals, term generations, formal essays, publishing those formal essays, and a final academic paper based on observations and academic readings)
• Introduce first writing assignment: read a chapter from Mead's Blackberry Winter and respond to it (assignment then used as a diagnostic tool)
• Assign first book (Reading Assignment A) and journal assignments. Explain how students will keep track (on an index card) of when they read and for how long. On Friday, give class time to begin reading self-chosen books.

Week Two

• Assign Writing Assignment 2, due in the second session of the week
• Reading Assignment A should be completed by the end of the week
• Hold class discussions on Friday based off the worksheets

Discovering Competence in Facts, Artifacts, and Counterfacts

Both books, The Discovery of Competence and Facts, Artifacts and Counterfacts present similar alternatives to the traditional remedial course. The courses cater to creating students who learn through the process of writing about meaningful, interesting subjects. The authors agree on the importance of bringing students into the academic discourse community through topics that engage their curiosity, but DoC focuses on more theoretical aspects of the course while FAC outlines the course in practical terms.

FAC uses autobiography to engage students schema in the course topic, "Growth and Change in Adolescence." DoC might suggest a different course topic, one that does not rely on students' personal experiences to engage their interest. Both books stress constant and meaningful teacher feedback and the use of a portfolio as assessment. However, the big ticket issue the authors may have with each other rests in in-class writing tests. While FAC defends their use of in-class, timed writing as preparing students for real academic rigour, DoC shies away from such pressured writing. Instead, DoC focuses solely on developing students who have time and opportunity to try our different writing techniques.

Initial reactions to Bartholomae and Petrosky's Course

In Facts, Artifacts, and Counterfacts: Theory and Method for a Reading and Writing Course, David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky explain pedagogy and purpose while outlining the format of their integrated reading and writing course. My immediate reaction to most of their reasonings and practices is favorable. I buy into their interpretation of critical pedagogy and composition theory: writing creates meaning, using language enables language use, and incorporating student interest increases student enjoyment.

Beginning with facts from student experience, Bartholomae and Petrosky create a discourse community that is inclusive of diverse student identities. Centering the topic around adolescence seems both topical and approachable to college freshmen. They foster the creation of academic identities through the increasingly challenging work within their seminar course. The movement from facts (students experiences) to creating artifacts (the students' written work) to the critical counterfacts (the teachers comments, class discussions of student papers) allows students to begin to understand the work of an expert in academia: composing from personal experiences, generating ideas through classroom discussions, and situating themselves within established academic discourses.

However, I imagine that co-teaching this course could go either way: well or to hell. Depending on the pedagogical practices and personality of your co-teacher, I think co-teaching could become problematic. At the same time, I do see how having two sets of readers will benefit students. I wonder if this course would be better suited to a full-time faculty professor plus a graduate student to T.A. the course. I could see how including a graduate student would lend another perspective to the course work. Along with creating a more approachable intermediary for students, graduate students are in the unique position of bridging the work of a student directly to the work of an academic, which may be helpful to freshmen who are unfamiliar with university.

My favorite technique they include in their course is the creation of terminology, negotiating and defining what terms are important to their study of adolescence. I also enjoy that they then use students own work as a text, further giving students confidence through the process of publishing and having classmates read their work. Also, the increasing responsibility of students to facilitate discussions is something I enjoy and see as vital to the development of student discourse practices. I will steal all of these, or, as a friend labels it, add them to my "sponge list."

Competence-based 3 Week Unit Plan

Day 1: Course and Unit Introduction

• introduce syllabus focused on learning objectives (15 minutes)
• sketch out student and teacher expectations (15 minutes)
• discuss course trajectory, what will be covered and why (5 Minutes)
• Beginning brainstorming through quick writes or drawing on how students approach writing an essay, group and class discussion if time
• Homework: Read an article about writing, Murray's "All Writing is Autobiography"

Day 2: Reading about Writing

• Have students free/quick write for five minutes before breaking into small groups (5 minutes)
• Ask students to discuss if they agree or disagree with Murray's ideas (20 minutes)
• After 20 minutes, bring class back together and discuss further (25 minutes)
• Homework: Students find an article about different writing processes (perhaps from an author they enjoy, or from an academic database)

Day 3: Writing about Writing to Other Writers

• Ask students to write a letter to a peer about the article they found, explaining why they chose it, what it says, and if they use similar writing processes (10 minutes)
• Students exchange letters and discuss as pairs, multiple times. (20 minutes)
• Come back together as a class and discuss the letters and the different writing processes, perhaps introducing any processes not covered by the students (20)
• Homework: Students take the letter they wrote and the ideas discussed, and write a letter to the composition teacher about their typical approach to writing a paper

Day 4: Thinking about Writing

• Students turn in letters to the teacher
• In-class discussion of: writing as thinking, thinking as learning, and, therefore, writing as learning. (20 minutes as a class)
• Asking for personal experiences of writing classes, papers, difficulties (small groups-10 min)
• Exploring the purposes for writing: why we write and the forms we use (small groups-10 min)
• Exploring what small groups discussed and contextualizing the importance of academic writing  (20 minutes)

Day 5: The Writing Prompt 

• Discussing the writing assignments objectives: to discuss the student's personal writing process in the context of academic and social writing, using personal examples and academic sources. (10 minutes)
• Coming up with class objectives together while discussing tactics for writing and researching (20 minutes as a group, 20 minutes as a class and creating a rubric)

Day 6: Brainstorming and Resource Gathering

• Start with a quick write about a random topic, then ask students to write on a topic of their own choosing. (5 minutes for each)
• In small groups, students discuss how they brainstormed (writing, outlining, listing, clustering, thinking, etc) and which topic was easier to write on (25 minutes)
• As a class, discuss importance of connecting with your idea, finding personal interests and connections to topics as a way to develop your thoughts (20 min)

Day 7: Drafting and Revising

• Return student letters with comments and questions and suggestions for their writing process, asking them to consider if they will change or use the same approach to writing this assignment (10 minutes, reading and then a small reflection for their own thinking)
• Discuss drafting, organizing, how revising can be a continuous process and should focus on structure and content--not proofreading (40 min)

Day 8: Editing

• Last step of editing (10 min)
• Peer-editing practice (30 min)
• Self-editing strategies (10 min)

Day 9: Reflection on the Prompt

• Papers are due
• Ask students to spend 20 minutes reflecting on their writing process of this paper, considering the letter and class discussions
• Attach letter to the paper
• Begin discussing next unit for the remainder of class

Assessing Competence, Chapter 8

In The Discovery of Competence, Kutz, Groden, and Zamel redefine literacy, learning, language, and how we teach composition. Accordingly, how we assess student's writing must necessarily change as well. Based on their sociocultural approach to student competence and the emphasis on discussion, Kutz, Groden, and Zamel view teachers and students as part of a inquiry-based learning environment that necessitates assessment as a continual conversation between teacher and student. 

Assessing students through authentic communication:

1. Students write "to" their teacher, not simply "for" the teacher.
2. Teachers respond to student writers as listeners respond to speakers in normal conversation: synthesizing, restating, inquiring, suggesting, and understanding ideas.
3. Introducing and including students in academic discourse by encouraging conversations about composition between teacher and student.
4. Using letters! Students writing to teachers and teachers writing to students. 
5. Also, students writing and responding to other students. Exchanging letters that analyze writing and increase students' metacognition of their composition strategies.
6. When teachers respond as readers, they create a shared understanding with students.
7. Discussing learning objectives of specific assignments with students, acknowledging and incorporating students prior knowledge by talking about each composition's goals and how we might approach the writing task. 
8. Negotiating the course's learning goals. Students may expect teachers to assess and focus on correct grammatical and structural forms. Instead, sharing the view of learning language as learning how to communicate.  
9. Negating traditional roles of teacher and student: viewing teachers and students as collaborators in the knowledge construction. 
10. Using portfolios: a collaborative, conversational form of assessment that increases engagement with learning. Allows students to view composition as a continual, conversational, and creative process. 

Competence-Based 15 Week Course

Unit 1: Weeks 1-3

In a class based in Kutz, Groden, and Zamel's ideology from The Discovery of Competence, equipping students with a problem-solving approach to personal learning functions as the foremost priority. To increase student engagement with class topics, texts and papers would focus on the connections between sociocultural communities and academic discourse communities. During the initial weeks of class, class objectives and learning goals (for students as individuals and the class as a discourse community) would be established through personal paragraphs and class discussion. Reading articles about reading and writing strategies and processes would attempt to increase students’ metacognition of their own writing processes. The first unit would conclude with a four-page paper of students’ personal analysis of their approach to academic reading and writing. The prompt would asking students to discuss their writing process, identify an area they would like to improve, and decide on strategies to test out as they work toward their learning goal.

Unit 2: Weeks 4-6

Establishing the importance of critical thinking and rhetorical reading strategies, students would be presented with a societal “problem” and asked to think and discuss on it in class and in writing. For example, if the topic was personal freedoms, students would find, establish, and discuss a connection to their personal lives. Course readings from varying voices and historical contexts within the academic and societal discussions of personal freedoms would broaden student's perspectives on the topic, encouraging further individual research coming in the next unit. A narrative would develop out of student's initial paragraphs, ending with a four-page paper on student’s personal connections to the course topic.

Unit 3: Weeks 7-9

Continuing students’ introduction into the academic community, this unit would focus on individual research on the course topic. Students would be given the tools to access academic journals, articles, and research. Rhetorical reading strategies would encourage critical analysis of information. The focus would be on transforming the previous unit’s personal narrative/discussion on the topic into a research-based paper: identifying the importance of personal opinions in encouraging interest and engagement with academic topics. Introducing formal research paper structure and style, students would have their first opportunity at writing in a conventional academic context—unlike previous informal and less-structured prompts.

Unit 4: 10-12

In this unit, students would have the freedom to decide on their own topic for research, based on personal interest. Organizing the class into small groups would allow students to support one another during the research process: sharing strategies, discussing various road blocks and solutions, asking questions about each other’s topics and theories, providing feedback on drafts, et cetera. A final research paper would be required (using original sources found by students), along with a response to each group members’ essay. This response is focused on furthering the conversation, not assessing peers essays. The learning objective is to increase student ability in instigating discussion and also continuing discourse through engagement with others’ ideas.

Unit 5: 13-15

The final unit would be focused on compiling a portfolio to show student progress. The teacher would have provided consistent, in-depth feedback on student writing throughout the semester. Students would be asked to review the teacher’s questions and suggestions along with any peer reviews, and then revise each research paper. The objective would be on incorporating feedback into improving writing, while also encouraging self-editing and revision. Student work becomes the course “text” where students must critically read and respond to their own writings.

The first paper on personal reading and writing strategies would be revisited. The final prompt would ask students to reflect on their first essay and chart their progress over the semester in their (hopefully increasing) comfort and confidence when using language—speaking, listening, responding, reading, and writing. The final result would be a portfolio including: the original learning goal essay, one personal narrative connecting to the course theme, two revised research papers, and a final reflective essay—allowing students to be critically and analytically aware of their own learning styles and strategies.