Durst:
Back to Durst, and back again to the concept of getting students interested in composition. We once again see the idea of allowing students to write about topics they’re interested in, but with the added benefit of forcing said students to become more analytical about these ideas throughout the semester. Here, we stumble upon a major problem: getting students to become analytical in the first place.
As I said in class (hopefully it’s not egotistical to cite yourself), most freshman comp students are coming from a culture where it’s not cool to smart, and it’s definitely not cool to over-think the “fun,” non-school parts of your life. The latter part of this attitude is reinforced by pre-college teachers, who have a limited view of “acceptable” topics for study and writing. So most of our students will have passions, but think that these passions – especially if they’re not “scholarly” – are unfit for discussions in the classroom, and especially unfit for use as the subjects of college writing. This is why more than half of the papers I reviewed as an undergrad tutor dealt with the “big three:” abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia.
These are important topics, and do deserve to be discussed. But when these topics are chosen by freshman comp students, it’s mostly because these subjects are “easy.” It’s easy to pick a side, and it’s easy to find information to support your side of choice. Even if students are clearly for or against one side of these topics, it’s rare that they’re passionate about them.
I love the idea put into practice in chapter 5: students starting from a “casual” writing position, then slowly developing writing about their interests until their work has merit on a level above sheer entertainment. There is trouble with this, however; Durst points out that this technique can lead to students writing very one-sided and biased argumentative papers on topics of major interest to them. I think that this problem can be overcome, and that the finding of value and depth in something previously assumed to have none (as least in the eyes of the University) is well worth the experimentation.
Students get the rush of “cheating the system” by writing about something they genuinely like, and perhaps enjoying the writing process. Teachers, in turn, receive better writing, and give students the chance to realize how rewarding being analytical can be.
I think it’s a win/win situation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I really enjoyed Durst's intense case analysis in chapter 5. I thought he did an excellent job in focusing his argument primarily on Cris. Sometimes researchers tend to write to broadly, making their statements weak. I really felt like I got to know Cris and her writing. Therefore, I was able to bring some of my own analysis of her experience to the table.
The main problem that arise with the students in the class is that they see writing as one thing, while the teacher sees it as another. It is the same problem we have been talking about in the last several class periods. When given the second, academic, paper assignment, students responded with immediate hesitation and confusion. The "easing" into the classroom, supposedly accomplished by the personal essay, didn't really work. The students did not take well to the teacher’s analytical approach to the initial grading, and so the walls already went up. By the time they got to the second assignment, they were already fearful of the teachers response. They seemed to have very little confidence in their ability to make an argument or to write about an academic subject. They simply all believed that the paper could never be interesting. They viewed academic writing as boring, and completely disconnected to the initial, "fun," personal essay assignment. They did not make the same connections the teacher did.
So, how are we supposed to ease students into academic writing? How are we supposed to get them interested in making arguments? As Durst's students responded, in high school students are not asked to think analytically. They are given very specific parameters. Should that pattern be broken in high school, or is it up to the college teacher to do so?
One other issue I want to raise, is how do we get students interested? Durst found that students who wrote about something they were interested in in their second essays wrote far better essays. But, how can you get those unmotivated students who treat everything as another assignment to do the same? What possible assignments or lessons could be given?
One other thing...
I really thought the role playing assignment was an interesting, fun, unique assignment, but it was not handled well by the class. Why do you guys think that was? I tend to agree with Durst in thinking the students were just a bit too imature for that kind of "playing." Plus, the topic was centered on sex, a very sensitive and embarassing issue for most 18 year olds.
Do you guys think the assignment would work with older students, or with a different topic?
Random thought on Durst 5:
I thought asking students to respond in class to a somewhat scientific topic—the essay on asexual reproduction—and think of ways to make it more “interesting” was an unusual way to resituate students’ perspectives on writing.
I realize this essay coordinated to the class’s assignment on a “concept,” but it also exposes them to another venue of writing. It might also help students recognize that informative, well-structured compositions are valuable in all fields, including science. Although we don’t want students to become detached, writing is not always intensely personal, narrative, or about the author. Most of the students seemed to think that the essay was “boring” or “dry,” but Sherry asked them to distinguish what they thought was interesting or boring and why. This initiates the analytic process while encouraging students to form and support their own opinion on a piece of writing, not just a broad social or political topic. They may not have enjoyed the article, but recognizing what works and what doesn’t in writing hopefully helped them model their own essays.
For a composition course, it seems like a nice variation from the usual formula of a poem or short story reading and discussion.
In response to Ashley’s comments on the role play:
Yes, I also thought the role playing assignment was a unique activity and that it might be better suited to a different topic. Maybe using it with some current event or on-campus controversy might be interesting. However, it might need to be approached with some tact—role plays may seem juvenile or silly to some students, don’t you think?
You were also wondering if the assignment would be more effective with older students. That’s a tough one. Older students would probably be less uncomfortable talking about birth control, but I don’t think sophomores, for instance, would be as interested in the subject. I think the teen pregnancy topic might lose some of that provocative, edgy factor for students who aren’t actually teens. Everyone has opinions, though, and it could still make for an interesting, casual dialog with older—perhaps more mature—students.
I really didn’t expect the discussion and role play to make Sherry’s class feel so awkward, but after reading the chapter I think you’re right: an issue involving sex might be too embarrassing for 18 year olds to openly talk about. It’s not only about being “embarrassed,” exactly. For some students, like Clarissa, it’s intensely personal. I guess that’s something we have to remember when approaching any topic of this nature. I don’t, however, think that we should shy from using controversial topics as a platform for debates or essays. But perhaps it could be approached differently. I certainly wouldn’t want to be responsible for making anyone cry in class!
At first, the assignment seemed like a great opportunity to incorporate students’ real-life concerns, reading, and research. Durst does mention that during “previous class discussions” he noticed that the issue of teen pregnancy was “a matter of real concern to students” in this course (109). So, I can see how Sherry would want to take advantage of a topic her students were interested in. The students would also be active participants in class and be able to practice structuring arguments.
Unfortunately, it didn’t go well, and I wonder what Sherry could have done differently. Perhaps the role play idea could have been translated to small groups, with each group investigating one of the positions and then responding to questions.
i think you're right, bob, that teachers have a fine line to walk in getting students engaged in the writing, the topic, the learning in their classes. last year, i conducted a focus group of six female undergrads to talk to me about their uses of and thinking about facebook as a space for literate practice. one thing that came through very clearly was that they wanted that space to remain their own. they thought it was kind of creepy for especially male teachers to contact them through facebook. they did not want assignments or class activities to be conducted through facebook. it was interesting timing, because at the same time, on the major writing studies listserv (wpa-l), teachers were talking about using facebook in their classes. it sort of underlined for me the need to communicate with our students - because the teachers were all thinking about the pedagogical possibilities and thinking that it would be a great way to engage their students (since the students were all using facebook every day already). but from what my focus group participants said, it wouldn't have been engaging to them at all - quite the opposite.
pam
Becca brings up a good point - that students need exposure to a wide range of writing genres, purposes, audiences. what i've found in the beginning-of-class-writing i ask students to do is that most of them think writing will be personal narrative (and it's the kind they're most comfortable with, it seems). but harder is the writing that asks them to consider other perspectives and articulate a response of their own (which is really just as personal as personal narrative, based as it is in their own values, beliefs).
pam
Pam, I loved hearing what you said about Facebook! An older male teacher I know just joined Facebook and I wasn't sure how to respond when he told me. Thanks for sharing your experience with the focus group.
Also just want to comment on this from Bob: "This is why more than half of the papers I reviewed as an undergrad tutor dealt with the 'big three:' abortion, capital punishment, and euthanasia."
I never saw it that way--that students are groping for an "academic" topic when they write essays on these issues--but I think you're totally right. Really interesting.
Post a Comment