Response to my Partner's Letter
Dear Jayme,
I think you have brought up a very good question. Here is my interpretation of that excerpt. I hope you find it useful.
I completely understand “the need to reform pedagogy, taking into account the rise of new technology.” I understand this need as some of the old ways of pedagogy are outdated and either ignore or disserve new technology. I take this as a calling for educators to readjust and improve current pedagogy to accommodate the times we live in and keep up with them in a sense. I also see it as a way to accommodate students better as time progresses.
I also understand that we should consider “the question of WAC and writers whose primary literacy is in languages other than English,” perhaps by allowing these writers to write in both their native language across the curriculum, in order to get a better grasp on the material, and in English, in order to practice their command on their new language. Perhaps they can either alternate between writing in the two languages or write two shorter responses, one in each language.
As for the part that confuses you, the last element that the text suggests we look more closely at, which is “politics, particularly [ ] as reflected in racism.” First, I would like to say that I agree with you when you say that it is “loaded.” I am not quite sure what the author meant by this. Perhaps they are suggesting that minorities have some unfair disadvantages when it comes to WAC.
You could be right when you suggest that she is trying to say that “literacy and [the] act of teaching in itself is much larger and [should] be looked at on a more social political level.” I definitely agree with you when you state “WAC and the communication of teachers across the board [are] important because [they] will change processes that held back the poor, women, and certain ethnicities in the past.” I’m not absolutely sure. I could be wrong about that. But I hope that helped, at least somewhat.
I also agree that communication across the board will encourage mental growth and that "all of us can use the tools at our disposal." To answer your question, I am not sure if “that will end hatred, dominance, and poor who are uneducated” either. It is actually very complicated. It may not end like that for some, because there will always be people that abuse their power. However, it might help others, because there will always be people who are more fortunate and would like to help those who are less fortunate and underprivileged. The world is very complex that way.
I think your second question concerning McCarthy's case study was yet another excellent question. I completely agree that “Dr. Forson should have broken down the assignment into assignments with series of drafts. Students could then use draft 1 to explore poetic terminology and use draft 2 to better develop thoughts and personal input.” I think that was an excellent suggestion on your part.
I also agree with your theory concerning Dave. I absolutely see where you are coming from when you say “Dave should have been given a chance to revise specifically what he was missing from his paper. In other words, if he was using theories incorrectly to support an opinion he should have been shown his mistake and given a chance to correct it. I think as teachers there is something to say about forgetting about grades and actually being concerned with students learning: reforming pedagogy.” I especially agree with the last sentence of your statement. As educators, we need to be primarily concerned with whether or not our students are actually learning and gaining from the assignments we assign, as opposed to worried about grades and or other less meaningful elements. As far as Doctor Forson's teaching method based on the case study and Dave's interpretation of the class, I see eye to eye with you in the sense that I also believe that Dave should have been given more support and that Dr. Forson should have been more flexible.
Hope you enjoyed our letter writing experience, see you in class on Tuesday night!
Sincerely,
Rachael
Reflection
I liked this assignment in the sense that we were able to see someone else’s perspective on the readings. I also agree with Jayme in the sense that these letters allowed us to think in ways we would not have otherwise thought in. I also really like the fact that it was easier to discuss overarching themes that appear in all of the readings, as opposed to isolated quotes. It was also nice to be able to compare and contrast readings. And perhaps the greatest part of the letter format is that you have the option of asking questions/ the open lines of communication. However, I do feel that there are some limitations to this type of blog. First, when responding to your partner’s letter, you are obligated to discuss the elements of the readings that interested/fascinated/confused that person, rather than the elements that interested/fascinated/confused you. Next, it is not simple to discuss readings that are not connected without breaking the flow of the letter in the process. Last, sometimes another person’s interpretation of the readings can confuse you further rather than help you understand better. Their interpretations may nurture your misconceptions or cause you to develop new misconceptions.
Overall, it was a good experience. I would try this format out with my future students. However, I would be sure to closely monitor the benefits and disadvantages and look for ways to constantly improve the format. I would likely give them a focus to write about for each letter. I see how this format can be useful, however I personally like the 2x Journals better for some reason.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
Blog #5
Letter to My Partner
Dear Jayme,
The first idea that comes to mind for me concerning this week’s readings is the ever important idea of connecting writing and content in a meaningful way. When Bean provided the example of how some “students complain that a writing teacher has no business criticizing one’s ideas (‘This is a writing class!’) just as a history or science teacher has no business criticizing one’s writing (‘This is not a writing class!’),” (16) this sparked a personal connection for me. As a high school student, I was usually frustrated when a writing teacher only commented on my spelling and grammar and said nothing concerning the content of my writing. It made me feel that the assignment was a waste of time and that I could have written just anything if I was going to be judged and graded based solely on spelling and grammar skills. This emphasis on skill allows writing students to get by without using any critical thinking or engagement in content. Therefore, I would personally disagree with this observation. I think the real problem is teachers who think this way, would you agree?
I believe that a large part of Bean’s underlying argument is that writing is critical for much more than spelling and grammar and I would agree. Good writing can do a lot. Bean describes academic writing, beginning at the bottom of page 17 and continuing at the top of page 18. This reminded me of one significant function of good writing, which is writing as a means of organization of ideas and evidence. I see organization as he describes structure, thesis statement, and supporting evidence. Do you see what I mean and would you agree?
Rose clearly shares Bean’s sentiments concerning writing. He also sees writing as an important component of learning. He demonstrates this as he explores the history of teaching writing and various theories concerning writing. At one point in the article, Rose discusses the strong emphasis that was placed on the scientific ways of teaching writing, such as finding ways to eliminate the production of errors in student writing in earlier times (Page 344-345). I found this portion of the reading interesting. However, I would absolutely agree with Rose when he states “When student writing is viewed in this particularistic, pseudo-scientific way, it gets defined in very limited terms as a narrow band of inadequate behavior separate from the vastly complex composing that faculty members engage in for a living and delve into for work and for play. And such perception yields what it intends: a behavior that is stripped of its rich cognitive and rhetorical complexity” (345). What are your thoughts?
Both Bean and Rose discuss writing as a tool. In certain ways I think it is and in certain ways I think it is much more. What do you think?
One of the largest issues I found in the readings was the problem of how to classify writing (Is it a skill? Is it a tool? Is it something else entirely?) I feel that this is a very complex question and is left somewhat unresolved. I would say it is and isn’t each of these. What are your thoughts?
And did you come across any other interesting quotes or ideas throughout your reading of this week’s texts that you would like to share with me?
Sincerely,
Rachael
Dear Jayme,
The first idea that comes to mind for me concerning this week’s readings is the ever important idea of connecting writing and content in a meaningful way. When Bean provided the example of how some “students complain that a writing teacher has no business criticizing one’s ideas (‘This is a writing class!’) just as a history or science teacher has no business criticizing one’s writing (‘This is not a writing class!’),” (16) this sparked a personal connection for me. As a high school student, I was usually frustrated when a writing teacher only commented on my spelling and grammar and said nothing concerning the content of my writing. It made me feel that the assignment was a waste of time and that I could have written just anything if I was going to be judged and graded based solely on spelling and grammar skills. This emphasis on skill allows writing students to get by without using any critical thinking or engagement in content. Therefore, I would personally disagree with this observation. I think the real problem is teachers who think this way, would you agree?
I believe that a large part of Bean’s underlying argument is that writing is critical for much more than spelling and grammar and I would agree. Good writing can do a lot. Bean describes academic writing, beginning at the bottom of page 17 and continuing at the top of page 18. This reminded me of one significant function of good writing, which is writing as a means of organization of ideas and evidence. I see organization as he describes structure, thesis statement, and supporting evidence. Do you see what I mean and would you agree?
Rose clearly shares Bean’s sentiments concerning writing. He also sees writing as an important component of learning. He demonstrates this as he explores the history of teaching writing and various theories concerning writing. At one point in the article, Rose discusses the strong emphasis that was placed on the scientific ways of teaching writing, such as finding ways to eliminate the production of errors in student writing in earlier times (Page 344-345). I found this portion of the reading interesting. However, I would absolutely agree with Rose when he states “When student writing is viewed in this particularistic, pseudo-scientific way, it gets defined in very limited terms as a narrow band of inadequate behavior separate from the vastly complex composing that faculty members engage in for a living and delve into for work and for play. And such perception yields what it intends: a behavior that is stripped of its rich cognitive and rhetorical complexity” (345). What are your thoughts?
Both Bean and Rose discuss writing as a tool. In certain ways I think it is and in certain ways I think it is much more. What do you think?
One of the largest issues I found in the readings was the problem of how to classify writing (Is it a skill? Is it a tool? Is it something else entirely?) I feel that this is a very complex question and is left somewhat unresolved. I would say it is and isn’t each of these. What are your thoughts?
And did you come across any other interesting quotes or ideas throughout your reading of this week’s texts that you would like to share with me?
Sincerely,
Rachael
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Blog #4
Fulwiler: Each term, I write weekly letters with one of my classes, composing my syllabus as a letter, requesting letters back. I would write letters with all my classes if I had the time and energy, but I don’t. I ask other classes to keep journals and share selected entries with me to which I informally respond (16).
Albanese: Is it just me or does this sound unfair? I completely understand how he would not have the time to write letters with multiple classes. However, it just seems completely unfair to the classes who do not get the opportunity to participate. If Fulwiler is advocating the use of these letters and arguing their effectiveness, then isn’t he also saying that his other classes who are not participating are receiving the short end of the stick? Isn’t he failing them in a sense? This is similar to choosing a favorite student; it is like he is choosing a favorite class and providing them with special treatment. If he cannot do it with all of his classes, then shouldn’t he find a different, more efficient method that he can provide to all of them, a method that doesn’t leave any student or class out?
Fulwiler: Most people write letters in their natural voices: first person pronouns, contradictions, personal asides, digressions, humor, slang, expletives…I prefer dashes to semicolons, ellipses to transitions, sometimes sentence fragments, other times endless sentences (19).
Albanese: In other words, I believe that Fulwiler is trying to say that letter writing is in a sense the most simple and basic form of writing. People generally tend to let their guards down when writing letters because they are not bound by limitations or conventions. They have the freedom to express themselves in their own unique ways, without the risk of being penalized or incorrect. Letter writing seems comfortable. Therefore, anyone can write a letter.
Fulwiler: At term’s end, I move the letters from an informal to a formal assignment-or as Peter Elbow would say, from low to high stakes- and expect now to see more focused, deliberate, and crafted writing examining themes, patterns, and concerns of a term’s worth of correspondence (23).
Albanese: I believe that this can be a good method because students have the opportunity to practice and experiment with their own writing all semester before they are required to present a formal piece of writing. At the point where students are asked to complete a high stakes writing assignment, they have already had enough practice with all of the low stakes writing assignments that have been assigned throughout the semester. Therefore, they are likely better prepared to succeed with their final writing assignments of the semester.
Bean: Although students normally write only a few formal papers for a course, they can do behind the scenes exploratory writing on a daily basis (6).
Albanese: This reminds me of Fulwiler’s letter writing assignments. Those assignments were a form of exploratory writing on a weekly basis. In the letters students grappled with and explored concepts from each of the texts and other class based issues. This is one good example of how to structure a form of low stakes writing. Those students were most definitely expanding their critical thinking skills as they wrote those exploratory letters each week. Journal entries also seem like a good form of exploratory writing.
Bean: Good writing, I like to tell my students, grows out of good talking-either talking with classmates or talking dialogically with oneself through exploratory writing (7).
Albanese: I completely agree with this statement. It is often true that hearing one person’s ideas, whether it be in a classroom discussion, small group, pair, or otherwise, tends to spark a connected or entirely new idea in another person. Hearing a survey of other people’s ideas might also assist in helping one come to their own informed conclusions. What one person knows another might lack knowledge of, talking collaboratively tends to help fill in the gaps.
Bean: No matter how much we exhort students to write several drafts and to collaborate with peers, most of our students will continue to write papers on the night before they are due unless we structure our courses to promote writing as a process (8).
Albanese: I believe that this quote is completely true. Unfortunately, I know people on the graduate level who still write papers the night before they are due! I believe it becomes a force of habit after a while. If we teach our students that writing is a serious process early on and get them into the habit of consistently writing drafts and making revisions for all of their formal writing assignments, then they will likely continue this habit for the rest of their academic careers.
McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss: The warning years of the twentieth century mark higher education’s winter of discontent a bleak time of scarce resources and few bright days. Survival is most on our minds, not doing extras that help our students learn more and better. The quest for students, external funding and ways to save money saps most of our institutional energy while faculty busily sandbag against rising teaching loads and class sizes (2).
Albanese: I agree with this quote to a certain extent. However, I recall reading somewhere that the beauty of WAC programs is that they do not necessary require a lot of funding to implement and teachers do not need extensive training in order to incorporate them into their classrooms. WAC is both simple and effective in many ways.
McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss: Service learning programs vary considerably across institutions, but they all have one thing in common: they attempt to connect the classroom to the community in a way that encourages experiential learning on the part of the students. In other words, they attempt to link town and gown in ways that simultaneously help the community and fulfill educational objectives (9).
Albanese: This reminds me of a project in which I participated in when I was in the seventh grade. Our science teacher had brought the class on a trip to a local park to plant flowers in the garden. We had a connected writing project in the classroom. I both enjoyed the project and learned more than I usually did in the science classroom. I still remember it to this day, it must have been effective. Therefore, I personally believe in the effectiveness of this method.
McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss: By its very nature, then, WAC has been and continues to be a dynamic movement, one well suited to a postmodern paradigm of change in higher education (22).
Albanese: This quote specifies the usefulness of WAC programs in ‘higher education.’ If WAC programs are appropriate for all school levels (elementary, middle, high school and so on), I am wondering why this chapter repeatedly focuses solely on higher education, failing to mention WAC’s use or effectiveness at any other level. I would like to read about WAC programs used on the secondary level because I feel that that would be most beneficial to me as a secondary teacher in training.
Williams: The great thing about repetition is that it makes items look like they belong together, even if the elements are not exactly the same. You can see here that once you establish a couple of key repetitive items, you can vary those items and still create a consistent look (59).
Albanese: The information in this particular quote sounds like it can be very useful to our individual website creation projects. I have highlighted and noted this quote to refer back to during the process of creating my website.
Williams: Don’t overdo it with repetition, but try to ‘unify with variety’ (61).
Albanese: I believe that this is a very important suggestion to be conscious of when creating any visual design. It is important to be cautious because if the repetition is overdone, the design can appear very cluttered and or overcrowded and therefore, visually displeasing to the reader.
Williams: A repetition of visual elements throughout the design unifies and strengthens a piece by tying together otherwise separate parts. Repetition is very useful on one-page pieces, and is critical in multi-page documents (where we often just call it being consistent).
Albanese: I have observed that each of the principles mentioned thus far, serve, in part, to unify the design. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that unity must be one of the top priorities in a design. Second, I have learned that repetition will be essential in our web design projects because they will each be ‘multi-page documents,’ where we need that consistency in order to create unity in each of our designs.
Emig: Critics of these terms like Louise Rosenblatt rightfully point out that the connotation of passivity too often accompanies the notion of receptivity when reading, like listening, is a vital, construing act (123).
Albanese: I agree with Rosenblatt as well. I also believe that reading should be an active activity as opposed to a passive one. A reader should be continuously attempting to make meaning of the words on the pages and to make connections as they are reading.
Emig: But to say that talking is a valuable form of prewriting is not to say that writing is talk recorded, an inaccuracy appearing in far too many composition texts (123).
Albanese: I believe that talking as pre-writing is more like of brain storming. Speaking is typically more spontaneous, while writing is typically more crafted, except in special cases, such as making a speech or presentation.
Britton: An ‘illusion of life’ she says, ‘is the primary illusion of all poetic art. It is at least tentatively established by the very first sentence, which has to switch the reader’s or hearer’s attitude from conversational interest to literary interest, i.e., from actuality to fiction. We make this shift with great care, and much more often than we realize, even in the midst of conversation; one has to say ‘You know about the two Scotchmen, who…,’ to make everybody in earshot suspend the actual conversation and attend to ‘the’ two Scots and ‘their’ absurdities. Jokes are a special literary form to which people will attend on the spur of the moment [1953 p.23] (153).
Albanese: I disagree with this quote. I believe that even a literary piece can begin sounding like a conversation and that a conversation can at times begin sounding like a literary piece. I believe the distinction between whether it is literary or conversational can come later, not always at the beginning. This can happen in cases where an artist is using the element of surprise and when everyday people attempt to sound more intellectual or artistic. In a way I believe that the two can be interchangeable at certain points. The ‘shift’ that she speaks of can take place later than she assumes.
Letter to My Partner
Dear Jayme,
This week I came across many interesting quotes in the readings. Some really stood out to me. I have passionate responses to some of these quotes, especially some of those I found in Fulwiler and Bean’s pieces. I found those two pieces to be the most compelling and most interesting readings of all of this week's readings. I also believe that they connect the most as well. In some instances, it seems as if the two authors are in dialogue with each other. I was wondering if you agree with my responses to some of their quotes or if you have a differing opinion that you would like to share with me.
The following are some of the Fulwiler quotes I found, my responses to them, and some questions for you.
“Each term, I write weekly letters with one of my classes, composing my syllabus as a letter, requesting letters back. I would write letters with all my classes if I had the time and energy, but I don’t. I ask other classes to keep journals and share selected entries with me to which I informally respond” (16).
Is it just me or does this sound unfair? I completely understand how he would not have the time to write letters with multiple classes. However, it just seems completely unfair to the classes who do not get the opportunity to participate. If Fulwiler is advocating the use of these letters and arguing their effectiveness, then isn’t he also saying that his other classes who are not participating are receiving the short end of the stick? Isn’t he failing them in a sense? This is similar to choosing a favorite student; it is like he is choosing a favorite class and providing them with special treatment. If he cannot do it with all of his classes, then shouldn’t he find a different, more efficient method that he can provide to all of them, a method that doesn’t leave any student or class out?
“Most people write letters in their natural voices: first person pronouns, contradictions, personal asides, digressions, humor, slang, expletives…I prefer dashes to semicolons, ellipses to transitions, sometimes sentence fragments, other times endless sentences” (19).
In other words, I believe that Fulwiler is trying to say that letter writing is in a sense the most simple and basic form of writing. People generally tend to let their guards down when writing letters because they are not bound by limitations or conventions. They have the freedom to express themselves in their own unique ways, without the risk of being penalized or incorrect. Letter writing seems comfortable. Do you agree with my observations?
“At term’s end, I move the letters from an informal to a formal assignment-or as Peter Elbow would say, from low to high stakes- and expect now to see more focused, deliberate, and crafted writing examining themes, patterns, and concerns of a term’s worth of correspondence” (23).
Do you believe that this can be a good method because students have the opportunity to practice and experiment with their own writing all semester before they are required to present a formal piece of writing? At the point where students are asked to complete a high stakes writing assignment, they have already had enough practice with all of the low stakes writing assignments that have been assigned throughout the semester. Do you think they are likely better prepared to succeed with their final writing assignments of the semester?
The following are some of the Bean quotes I found, my responses to them, and some questions for you.
“Although students normally write only a few formal papers for a course, they can do behind the scenes exploratory writing on a daily basis” (6).
This reminds me of Fulwiler’s letter writing assignments. Those assignments were a form of exploratory writing on a weekly basis. In the letters students grappled with and explored concepts from each of the texts and other class based issues. This is one good example of how to structure a form of low stakes writing. Those students were most definitely expanding their critical thinking skills as they wrote those exploratory letters each week. Do you agree? Do you think journal entries also seem like a good form of exploratory writing?
“Good writing, I like to tell my students, grows out of good talking-either talking with classmates or talking dialogically with oneself through exploratory writing” (7).
I completely agree with this statement, do you agree? It is often true that hearing one person’s ideas, whether it be in a classroom discussion, small group, pair, or otherwise, tends to spark a connected or entirely new idea in another person. Hearing a survey of other people’s ideas might also assist in helping one come to their own informed conclusions. Do you think what one person knows another might lack knowledge of? Do you also think that talking collaboratively tends to help fill in the gaps?
“No matter how much we exhort students to write several drafts and to collaborate with peers, most of our students will continue to write papers on the night before they are due unless we structure our courses to promote writing as a process” (8).
I believe that this quote is completely true. Unfortunately, I know people on the graduate level who still write papers the night before they are due! I believe it becomes a force of habit after a while. Do you think if we teach our students that writing is a serious process early on we will get them into the habit of consistently writing drafts and making revisions for all of their formal writing assignments, then they will likely continue this habit for the rest of their academic careers?
Lastly, there is one quote from McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss’ piece that I would like to share.
“By its very nature, then, WAC has been and continues to be a dynamic movement, one well suited to a postmodern paradigm of change in higher education” (22).
This quote specifies the usefulness of WAC programs in ‘higher education.’ If WAC programs are appropriate for all school levels (elementary, middle, high school and so on), Does this chapter make you wonder why it repeatedly focuses solely on higher education, failing to mention WAC’s use or effectiveness at any other level? Wouldn’t you like to read about WAC programs used on the secondary level because they would be most beneficial to you as a secondary teacher in training?
Sincerely,
Rachael
Response to my Partner's Letter
Dear Jayme,
I do agree with your theory that Chapter 1 of WAC is a great outline for thinking about Writing Across the Curriculum as a whole. I think that is an excellent observation.
Also, I completely agree with your notion that students should be learning integration at an even earlier level in high school. In fact, I even asked you a similar question in my letter prior to reading your letter. High school definitely should not be for learning information and fact only, leaving college as the time to actually start thinking critically! And to answer your question, I do not think that critical thinking can be separated from active learning. In fact, I believe the two go hand in hand with each other.
Also, Yes, I do think that WAC should be a part of all levels of schooling, since writing is needed for students to think critically and make connections.
And yes, I do think that WAC has become ECAC (Electronic Communication Across the Curriculum). I also do think that WAC changing to ECAC is just another restructuring and transformation to allow for more critical and active thinking and if students are comfortable with technology and will likely need to be familiar with different forms of technology for most future careers, then why not?
Lastly, I am not completely sure of what you mean when you say “Would [that] mean that WAC has integrated into another domain?” I believe that WAC is its own domain in certain ways. However, I apologize, I cannot answer that question directly and specifically because I'm not exactly sure what you mean.
Sincerely,
Rachael
Albanese: Is it just me or does this sound unfair? I completely understand how he would not have the time to write letters with multiple classes. However, it just seems completely unfair to the classes who do not get the opportunity to participate. If Fulwiler is advocating the use of these letters and arguing their effectiveness, then isn’t he also saying that his other classes who are not participating are receiving the short end of the stick? Isn’t he failing them in a sense? This is similar to choosing a favorite student; it is like he is choosing a favorite class and providing them with special treatment. If he cannot do it with all of his classes, then shouldn’t he find a different, more efficient method that he can provide to all of them, a method that doesn’t leave any student or class out?
Fulwiler: Most people write letters in their natural voices: first person pronouns, contradictions, personal asides, digressions, humor, slang, expletives…I prefer dashes to semicolons, ellipses to transitions, sometimes sentence fragments, other times endless sentences (19).
Albanese: In other words, I believe that Fulwiler is trying to say that letter writing is in a sense the most simple and basic form of writing. People generally tend to let their guards down when writing letters because they are not bound by limitations or conventions. They have the freedom to express themselves in their own unique ways, without the risk of being penalized or incorrect. Letter writing seems comfortable. Therefore, anyone can write a letter.
Fulwiler: At term’s end, I move the letters from an informal to a formal assignment-or as Peter Elbow would say, from low to high stakes- and expect now to see more focused, deliberate, and crafted writing examining themes, patterns, and concerns of a term’s worth of correspondence (23).
Albanese: I believe that this can be a good method because students have the opportunity to practice and experiment with their own writing all semester before they are required to present a formal piece of writing. At the point where students are asked to complete a high stakes writing assignment, they have already had enough practice with all of the low stakes writing assignments that have been assigned throughout the semester. Therefore, they are likely better prepared to succeed with their final writing assignments of the semester.
Bean: Although students normally write only a few formal papers for a course, they can do behind the scenes exploratory writing on a daily basis (6).
Albanese: This reminds me of Fulwiler’s letter writing assignments. Those assignments were a form of exploratory writing on a weekly basis. In the letters students grappled with and explored concepts from each of the texts and other class based issues. This is one good example of how to structure a form of low stakes writing. Those students were most definitely expanding their critical thinking skills as they wrote those exploratory letters each week. Journal entries also seem like a good form of exploratory writing.
Bean: Good writing, I like to tell my students, grows out of good talking-either talking with classmates or talking dialogically with oneself through exploratory writing (7).
Albanese: I completely agree with this statement. It is often true that hearing one person’s ideas, whether it be in a classroom discussion, small group, pair, or otherwise, tends to spark a connected or entirely new idea in another person. Hearing a survey of other people’s ideas might also assist in helping one come to their own informed conclusions. What one person knows another might lack knowledge of, talking collaboratively tends to help fill in the gaps.
Bean: No matter how much we exhort students to write several drafts and to collaborate with peers, most of our students will continue to write papers on the night before they are due unless we structure our courses to promote writing as a process (8).
Albanese: I believe that this quote is completely true. Unfortunately, I know people on the graduate level who still write papers the night before they are due! I believe it becomes a force of habit after a while. If we teach our students that writing is a serious process early on and get them into the habit of consistently writing drafts and making revisions for all of their formal writing assignments, then they will likely continue this habit for the rest of their academic careers.
McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss: The warning years of the twentieth century mark higher education’s winter of discontent a bleak time of scarce resources and few bright days. Survival is most on our minds, not doing extras that help our students learn more and better. The quest for students, external funding and ways to save money saps most of our institutional energy while faculty busily sandbag against rising teaching loads and class sizes (2).
Albanese: I agree with this quote to a certain extent. However, I recall reading somewhere that the beauty of WAC programs is that they do not necessary require a lot of funding to implement and teachers do not need extensive training in order to incorporate them into their classrooms. WAC is both simple and effective in many ways.
McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss: Service learning programs vary considerably across institutions, but they all have one thing in common: they attempt to connect the classroom to the community in a way that encourages experiential learning on the part of the students. In other words, they attempt to link town and gown in ways that simultaneously help the community and fulfill educational objectives (9).
Albanese: This reminds me of a project in which I participated in when I was in the seventh grade. Our science teacher had brought the class on a trip to a local park to plant flowers in the garden. We had a connected writing project in the classroom. I both enjoyed the project and learned more than I usually did in the science classroom. I still remember it to this day, it must have been effective. Therefore, I personally believe in the effectiveness of this method.
McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss: By its very nature, then, WAC has been and continues to be a dynamic movement, one well suited to a postmodern paradigm of change in higher education (22).
Albanese: This quote specifies the usefulness of WAC programs in ‘higher education.’ If WAC programs are appropriate for all school levels (elementary, middle, high school and so on), I am wondering why this chapter repeatedly focuses solely on higher education, failing to mention WAC’s use or effectiveness at any other level. I would like to read about WAC programs used on the secondary level because I feel that that would be most beneficial to me as a secondary teacher in training.
Williams: The great thing about repetition is that it makes items look like they belong together, even if the elements are not exactly the same. You can see here that once you establish a couple of key repetitive items, you can vary those items and still create a consistent look (59).
Albanese: The information in this particular quote sounds like it can be very useful to our individual website creation projects. I have highlighted and noted this quote to refer back to during the process of creating my website.
Williams: Don’t overdo it with repetition, but try to ‘unify with variety’ (61).
Albanese: I believe that this is a very important suggestion to be conscious of when creating any visual design. It is important to be cautious because if the repetition is overdone, the design can appear very cluttered and or overcrowded and therefore, visually displeasing to the reader.
Williams: A repetition of visual elements throughout the design unifies and strengthens a piece by tying together otherwise separate parts. Repetition is very useful on one-page pieces, and is critical in multi-page documents (where we often just call it being consistent).
Albanese: I have observed that each of the principles mentioned thus far, serve, in part, to unify the design. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that unity must be one of the top priorities in a design. Second, I have learned that repetition will be essential in our web design projects because they will each be ‘multi-page documents,’ where we need that consistency in order to create unity in each of our designs.
Emig: Critics of these terms like Louise Rosenblatt rightfully point out that the connotation of passivity too often accompanies the notion of receptivity when reading, like listening, is a vital, construing act (123).
Albanese: I agree with Rosenblatt as well. I also believe that reading should be an active activity as opposed to a passive one. A reader should be continuously attempting to make meaning of the words on the pages and to make connections as they are reading.
Emig: But to say that talking is a valuable form of prewriting is not to say that writing is talk recorded, an inaccuracy appearing in far too many composition texts (123).
Albanese: I believe that talking as pre-writing is more like of brain storming. Speaking is typically more spontaneous, while writing is typically more crafted, except in special cases, such as making a speech or presentation.
Britton: An ‘illusion of life’ she says, ‘is the primary illusion of all poetic art. It is at least tentatively established by the very first sentence, which has to switch the reader’s or hearer’s attitude from conversational interest to literary interest, i.e., from actuality to fiction. We make this shift with great care, and much more often than we realize, even in the midst of conversation; one has to say ‘You know about the two Scotchmen, who…,’ to make everybody in earshot suspend the actual conversation and attend to ‘the’ two Scots and ‘their’ absurdities. Jokes are a special literary form to which people will attend on the spur of the moment [1953 p.23] (153).
Albanese: I disagree with this quote. I believe that even a literary piece can begin sounding like a conversation and that a conversation can at times begin sounding like a literary piece. I believe the distinction between whether it is literary or conversational can come later, not always at the beginning. This can happen in cases where an artist is using the element of surprise and when everyday people attempt to sound more intellectual or artistic. In a way I believe that the two can be interchangeable at certain points. The ‘shift’ that she speaks of can take place later than she assumes.
Letter to My Partner
Dear Jayme,
This week I came across many interesting quotes in the readings. Some really stood out to me. I have passionate responses to some of these quotes, especially some of those I found in Fulwiler and Bean’s pieces. I found those two pieces to be the most compelling and most interesting readings of all of this week's readings. I also believe that they connect the most as well. In some instances, it seems as if the two authors are in dialogue with each other. I was wondering if you agree with my responses to some of their quotes or if you have a differing opinion that you would like to share with me.
The following are some of the Fulwiler quotes I found, my responses to them, and some questions for you.
“Each term, I write weekly letters with one of my classes, composing my syllabus as a letter, requesting letters back. I would write letters with all my classes if I had the time and energy, but I don’t. I ask other classes to keep journals and share selected entries with me to which I informally respond” (16).
Is it just me or does this sound unfair? I completely understand how he would not have the time to write letters with multiple classes. However, it just seems completely unfair to the classes who do not get the opportunity to participate. If Fulwiler is advocating the use of these letters and arguing their effectiveness, then isn’t he also saying that his other classes who are not participating are receiving the short end of the stick? Isn’t he failing them in a sense? This is similar to choosing a favorite student; it is like he is choosing a favorite class and providing them with special treatment. If he cannot do it with all of his classes, then shouldn’t he find a different, more efficient method that he can provide to all of them, a method that doesn’t leave any student or class out?
“Most people write letters in their natural voices: first person pronouns, contradictions, personal asides, digressions, humor, slang, expletives…I prefer dashes to semicolons, ellipses to transitions, sometimes sentence fragments, other times endless sentences” (19).
In other words, I believe that Fulwiler is trying to say that letter writing is in a sense the most simple and basic form of writing. People generally tend to let their guards down when writing letters because they are not bound by limitations or conventions. They have the freedom to express themselves in their own unique ways, without the risk of being penalized or incorrect. Letter writing seems comfortable. Do you agree with my observations?
“At term’s end, I move the letters from an informal to a formal assignment-or as Peter Elbow would say, from low to high stakes- and expect now to see more focused, deliberate, and crafted writing examining themes, patterns, and concerns of a term’s worth of correspondence” (23).
Do you believe that this can be a good method because students have the opportunity to practice and experiment with their own writing all semester before they are required to present a formal piece of writing? At the point where students are asked to complete a high stakes writing assignment, they have already had enough practice with all of the low stakes writing assignments that have been assigned throughout the semester. Do you think they are likely better prepared to succeed with their final writing assignments of the semester?
The following are some of the Bean quotes I found, my responses to them, and some questions for you.
“Although students normally write only a few formal papers for a course, they can do behind the scenes exploratory writing on a daily basis” (6).
This reminds me of Fulwiler’s letter writing assignments. Those assignments were a form of exploratory writing on a weekly basis. In the letters students grappled with and explored concepts from each of the texts and other class based issues. This is one good example of how to structure a form of low stakes writing. Those students were most definitely expanding their critical thinking skills as they wrote those exploratory letters each week. Do you agree? Do you think journal entries also seem like a good form of exploratory writing?
“Good writing, I like to tell my students, grows out of good talking-either talking with classmates or talking dialogically with oneself through exploratory writing” (7).
I completely agree with this statement, do you agree? It is often true that hearing one person’s ideas, whether it be in a classroom discussion, small group, pair, or otherwise, tends to spark a connected or entirely new idea in another person. Hearing a survey of other people’s ideas might also assist in helping one come to their own informed conclusions. Do you think what one person knows another might lack knowledge of? Do you also think that talking collaboratively tends to help fill in the gaps?
“No matter how much we exhort students to write several drafts and to collaborate with peers, most of our students will continue to write papers on the night before they are due unless we structure our courses to promote writing as a process” (8).
I believe that this quote is completely true. Unfortunately, I know people on the graduate level who still write papers the night before they are due! I believe it becomes a force of habit after a while. Do you think if we teach our students that writing is a serious process early on we will get them into the habit of consistently writing drafts and making revisions for all of their formal writing assignments, then they will likely continue this habit for the rest of their academic careers?
Lastly, there is one quote from McLeod/ Miraglia/ Soven/ Thaiss’ piece that I would like to share.
“By its very nature, then, WAC has been and continues to be a dynamic movement, one well suited to a postmodern paradigm of change in higher education” (22).
This quote specifies the usefulness of WAC programs in ‘higher education.’ If WAC programs are appropriate for all school levels (elementary, middle, high school and so on), Does this chapter make you wonder why it repeatedly focuses solely on higher education, failing to mention WAC’s use or effectiveness at any other level? Wouldn’t you like to read about WAC programs used on the secondary level because they would be most beneficial to you as a secondary teacher in training?
Sincerely,
Rachael
Response to my Partner's Letter
Dear Jayme,
I do agree with your theory that Chapter 1 of WAC is a great outline for thinking about Writing Across the Curriculum as a whole. I think that is an excellent observation.
Also, I completely agree with your notion that students should be learning integration at an even earlier level in high school. In fact, I even asked you a similar question in my letter prior to reading your letter. High school definitely should not be for learning information and fact only, leaving college as the time to actually start thinking critically! And to answer your question, I do not think that critical thinking can be separated from active learning. In fact, I believe the two go hand in hand with each other.
Also, Yes, I do think that WAC should be a part of all levels of schooling, since writing is needed for students to think critically and make connections.
And yes, I do think that WAC has become ECAC (Electronic Communication Across the Curriculum). I also do think that WAC changing to ECAC is just another restructuring and transformation to allow for more critical and active thinking and if students are comfortable with technology and will likely need to be familiar with different forms of technology for most future careers, then why not?
Lastly, I am not completely sure of what you mean when you say “Would [that] mean that WAC has integrated into another domain?” I believe that WAC is its own domain in certain ways. However, I apologize, I cannot answer that question directly and specifically because I'm not exactly sure what you mean.
Sincerely,
Rachael
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)