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."