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.