Approaching Teaching Composition
As showcased in our readings, there are a variety of approaches an individual can classify themselves under when it comes to teaching composition. While these approaches can vary in emphasis, Berlin expresses that all composition approaches hold the same pedagogical foundations. For example, while expressionists put a lot of emphasis on students and their writing, they are no less pedagogically sound than another approach.
One thing that I seemed to come back to as I was reading Fulkerson's article was just the idea that composition is messy and can be complex. In terms of teaching, our students can get a different idea of impression of composition based on what pedagogical approach we use. For example, if I am emphasizing process with my students and focusing a lot on revision and the overall writing process as a whole, they may get the impression that writing is a process and takes time and energy. On the other hand, if I take a more expressionist approach, which to me can overlap with student-centered learning, students are more likely to get the impression that composition is about individuals and their experiences. In both approaches, students and process are important; however, depending on the approach varies how much those aspects are emphasized and what potential takeaways students may find.
In my own classroom, I try and find a balance of emphasizing process and the importance of focusing on students and their writing. I think a combination of these approaches is a good way to allow students to feel heard, but also express that writing is a complex process that takes time and practice. For anyone wanting to know a little more about process theory, here is a link that helps break it down: https://heathersprelimnotes.wordpress.com/2014/08/18/flower-and-hayes-a-cognitive-process-theory-of-writing/
One question I did have while reading: How do you approach your students? What do you emphasize and hope they takeaway from your own teachings of composition?
Abbie,
ReplyDeleteYou’re absolutely right, process pedagogy means so many things to so many different scholars within (and apart from) the field of composition. As discussed in class, imagining composition and the teaching of composition without process pedagogy seems borderline ridiculous (what were we thinking!). Though given our [pedagogical] history of current-traditional rhetoric and our current (intentional or not) employment of current-traditional rhetoric, the theory of process pedagogy, though presumed as “best,” has its kinks just as its presumed opposite. Pedagogy that values and dissects the composing process, individual truths (expressionist and social), and the supposed “flow of knowledge” (cognitive), is hard to put into practice. The lack of “rules” that alienate it from its counter (current-traditional) leads me to question, “Is it [process pedagogy] everything and therefore nothing at all?”
Though we can certainly agree that at its core it is something (and something special), if we are to value process pedagogy, we ourselves have to value the process of practicing process pedagogy and allow ourselves to acknowledge when we slip into current-traditional habits of teaching composition too—as we discussed in class, debris of this practice still seep into our practice. This is all to say, process pedagogy is difficult— to work out those kinks and to explain this to students. If we are to abide by either the expressivist or the cognitive subsect in totality and therefore neglect the merited “social” subsect, we are failing to do something. As the conversation usually goes, it is all about balance.
Abbie,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement about pedagogy: it all seems to come from the same origin of wanting to better the current type of writing instruction. It also greatly differs depending on which scholar is discussing the theory, as you can see from the differences in Murray and Crowley's explanations of process pedagogy. I find this mishmash of theories to be a little confusing, but it's comforting to see the connections between everything and know that pedagogy isn't "all or nothing" in our classrooms (such as being all process, all current-traditional, etc.).
As for my own classroom, I also try to use a combination of pedagogies like you do. I think it would be impossible to just focus on one within the classroom under the current university system we have. We almost have to combine other theories with the current-traditional model because that's what the university supports. I still like the amount of freedom given in our classrooms, but as Christian mentioned in class on Tuesday, it's almost impossible to find the time to teach each theory exactly as advertised. It would be impossible to teach a research paper within one semester if we truly followed Murray's guidelines for process pedagogy, especially with all of the drafting he allows. As cool as I think it would be to teach a purely process based class, it would break the traditional structure of ENG 104 more than we're allowed to. Using a combination of theories helps to combat the pressure to instill every single element of each theory into my students, which I find helps me to relax in the classroom.
Hi Abbie,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about this pedagogy thing you shared. But you know what, teaching and learning are open and free. You can't just bind them in any firm structure. That would lose it's effectiveness then. The same thing happens for pedagogy too. Different theories have been approached after researching on the ways first. Researchers name them later, but the ways, the strategies came first.
So, I think you should focus on your own way and obviously on the students. Sometimes you have to combat different approaches all together to have your objectives fulfilled.
I think we should have a certain process in mind before starting so that we don't get confused later. But anytime it requires we can bring changes in our ways or merge different approaches.
We just need to focus on the ultimate goals and that is to ensure our students development in writing.
Hi Abbie,
ReplyDeleteI feel you have come into an interesting reflection. Finding a balance between different composition approaches is not an easy task, especially for us who are just staring this journey as composition teachers. Yet, I agree with you when you talk about the balance you are trying to establish in your classes. It is very nice to think of writing as a process, but I think it is also important to see it as a complex task that requires analysis and the consideration of many other aspects. Our students should understand that we care about how they are learning and not only what their grades are for an assignment. The balance you mention might really help them explore different possibilities and ways to write that go beyond form and mechanics. As the tasks I have assigned so far are not too rigorous in terms of what my students are asked to write about, I feel that I need to prepare them for the transition into more academic tasks that have some set formats and that they should approach considering the type of writers they want to be. For your last question, in my classes, I emphasize process, but also freedom. I want them to understand that if they don't like what they are writing about, they will never enjoy it. Therefore, most of my projects for this semester give them the possibility to make decisions on some of the aspects they attain at the end of the unit. Although I consider grammar to be an important aspect in writing, I never emphasize on it in my class so that my students understand that I am more interested in other elements, then, they can put more effort into the most relevant aspects of writing, according to what we are learning as instructors and our own values.
Great questions! I especially appreciate your question about the connection between what we emphasize as teachers and what we hope our students will take away from that (way of?) teaching. Generally speaking, I hope that my students would realize that the way I am teaching them to write and do research and think through the problems they come up against are not the only way of doing things. Basically, I hope to teach them as many things as possible so that they can pick and choose what works for them. Yet, I often find it hard to do this for various reasons. One of the biggest problems is that there is just not enough time. I am beginning to see that a good portion of the class time is just making sure everyone is on the same page about what I am asking them to do. However, the problem also lies in the fact that if I give them too much information at once, what are they actually going to remember from it all? It think this is probably a delicate balance that I just haven’t established yet.
ReplyDeleteAbbie,
ReplyDeleteThanks for providing a link to the blog post about cognitive process theory! I think the idea of composing as a "goal directed thinking process" is really interesting. One of the things that I tried to incorporate into my unit while I was teaching last semester was goal setting, so it's interesting to read how goal setting can be part of a cognitive process approach. To answer your question about approach, I think that I am still trying to develop my approach or philosophy. However, one of the main aspects of my belief about composition (that I hope I have conveyed to my students) is that writing is a skill that can be developed. I know that some students have had past experiences with writing that make them believe they are a "bad writer" and so one of my goals is to convey to students not only that they can improve their writing, but also hopefully the value of their own unique writing process, style and voice. From our readings for this week, I feel like my approach has some hints of all three of the approaches that Fulkerson discussed so I am not quite sure how to define my approach yet, but I look forward to seeing how it develops throughout this semester. Thanks for your post!