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