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.