Key Words

Audience	This refers to the intended recipient of the author’s message. Aristotle recognized the importance of audience in rhetoric in ancient Greece. He advocated appealing to the audience through ethos, pathos and logos. Ede and Lunsford also write about the importance of audience how the two schools of thought on audience (addressed and invoked) fail to grasp the complexity of the rhetorical situation. Ede and Lunsford suggest that the audience is addressed when the composition is edited to meet their expectations and they are invoked when the author imagines the role that the audience will play and builds prompts into the writing for the audience to recognize their role.
David Bartholomae	Author of “Inventing the University,” Bartholomae writes about the difficulties that students face in their attempt to enter academia. Students must learn the language, customs, and “codes” of the academy in order to become part of a discourse community that they are somewhat ignorant of (at least to begin with). Bartholomae indicates the student’s work can be analyzed to ascertain where the students are within this discourse community and society as a whole.
Patricia Bizzell	Talks about contact zones as a new way to approach composition studies. The contact zone is defined as a meeting place between cultures where conflict occurs. According to Bizzell, literary study should be divided and studied based on contact zones in order for students to have a true multicultural understanding of how knowledge and power was constructed.
Critical thinking	Critical thinking is the ability to analyze and reflect upon an idea and understand the relationships that the idea has with the world around. Ira Shor and James Berlin are proponents of pedagogies that encourage critical thinking. In their writings they state that students should be taught about how knowledge is formed and the social nature of knowledge building. Understanding that knowledge creation is a social function allows the student to explore beyond the façade of the concept, and to join in the academic discussion as a peer within the discourse community.
Peter Elbow	Elbow wrote about the “mother tongue” and the academy’s past record of trying to eradicate all but Standard Written English from formal composition. Elbow suggests that allowing students to identify and use their own dialects will enrich the world of composition by allowing a range of voices to be heard that had previously been suppressed. The students would benefit from using their mother tongue because they would no longer be marginalized, and would be able to establish their own identity in their work.
Freewriting	Peter Elbow wrote about the benefits of freewriting. Freewriting is when you begin writing whatever comes to mind and you do not stop to edit. Elbow suggests that writing is often encumbered by simultaneous editing that detracts from the rhythm of the composition. Freewriting allows the student to focus on what they want to say, and to spend less time focusing on how they say it. By freewriting, Elbow suggests that students will be able to find their “voice” as writers.
Richard Fulkerson	Fulkerson wrote about the four philosophies of composition which he identified as formal, expressive, rhetorical and mimetic.  Formalist composition values internal forms such as spelling and grammar and good writing is measured by the writer’s ability to write correctly. Expressionist composition values personal exploration rather than formal structures and the author’s “voice” is seen as a key component of “good” writing. Mimetic composition states that good writing is a reflection of good thinking and that logical, well-reasoned and factually substantiated writing is good writing. Rhetorical composition measures good writing by the author’s ability to achieve the desired effect on the desired audience.

Keywords and my Syllabus

James Berlin describes the major pedagogical theories of composition, which include Classicist, Current-traditionalists, Expressionists and New Rhetoricians. Berlin is an advocate of the latter theory and describes this as a theory that embraces the changing nature of rhetoric in the face of political, social and economic forces that shape accepted knowledge.
The writings of James Berlin greatly affected my course design. I believe that my teaching philosophy falls under the title of social-epistemic rhetoric, which Berlin advocates as a form of New Rhetoric. According to this theory rhetoric is a political action involving the interactions between the  material world, discourse community and writer. My course assignments attempt to have students question the role of politics in knowledge creation, and to see how this can affect composition.

Praxis is described as practicing theory. I encountered the term in an article by Ira Shor. Shor discusses praxis in the teaching of critical thinking and explains that critical thinking is a theory in practice (praxis) that takes input from the students and creates dialogue and reflection. One of my mission statements is to practice theory that encourages critical thinking.

Marginalization occurs frequently in academia. Paulo Freire writes about marginalization in his article on the banking concept. In the banking concept the student is viewed as an empty vessel to be filled with the knowledge of the teacher. This style of pedagogy marginalizes the student by making them subordinate to the teacher who expects the student to memorize and then regurgitate the information that has been chosen by the dominant culture without analysis or reflection.
I have attempted to create a syllabus that can change with the interests of the students and recognize individual experience in the making of meaning. This is an attempt to ensure that knowledge creation is a collaborative process between student and student and teacher and students.

Post-process theory occurred as a reaction to the process movement within composition. Post-process denies the ability to teach a set of steps or mechanical techniques that will result in "good" writing. There is no post-process pedagogy, since much of post-process scholarship focuses on criticisms of process theory.  According to Kastman-Breuch, post-process theory advocates increased student involvement and dialogue. The post-process idea of writing as public influenced my syllabus and resulted in a focus on peer dialogue.

Expressive writing is part of the expressionist or neo-platonic theory of composition. According to this theory, truth is based on personal understanding of sensory experiences, and writing cannot convey truth, but merely remove error. I attempted to distance myself from this theory except where it overlaps with social-epistemic rhetoric. The expressionist theory places the existence of truth in the individual, and therefore underplays the role of politics and other factors in the construction of truth.

Sample syllabus assignment

Reading from previous week:

"On Audience and Composition" Lisa Ede

Assignment:

Select a newspaper article from this week's campus paper. Write a two-page analysis of the article that you have selected. Summarize what you think the author's message is to the audience. Be sure to identify the intended audience and provide specific examples of how the author has communicated with this audience in mind. Give some examples of how the article could be changed to more effectively convey the intended message to the audience you have identified.

Learning Objectives:

Understand the important role audience that plays in the rhetorical situation.

The reading will give students an overview of how audience has historically been handled in the composition classroom and introduce varyious perspectives on the importance of audience in the composition process. The assignment will challenge the student to envision a specific audience, which is a task that the article indicates is difficult for many young writers.

What is Literacy?

What a tricky question! Answering this question with any degree of specificity is to embark on a very slippery slope indeed. Literacy has had different meanings from one time to the next. It is transient and malleable. Just think about all of the different ways that the word literacy can be used. When we say someone cannot read we call them illiterate. When someone is computer savvy we say they are computer literate. We talk about cultural literacy and personal literacy, and in each of these instances the term literacy means something different. In a broad sense I would describe literacy as one's ability to make and communicate meaning.

Someone who is "illiterate" in the traditional sense (meaning that they cannot read or write) may be very culturally literate. Kathleen Yancey's article "Made Not Only in Words: Composition in a New Key" highlights the changing nature of literacy. How literacy is defined is changing with the dawn of new technologies. Being literate can no longer be defined as one's ability to understand the written word, because there are so many types of literacy. Our definition of literacy can no longer be confined to mean someone who possesses one particular set of skills.

If literacy is one's ability to make and communicate meaning, what does this mean for our technologically advanced society? In future generations will illiterate refer to people who cannot communicate using technology? Our ability to master new modes of communication may be the key to literacy in the future, or perhaps that time has already come. Yancey gives us something to think about when she says "changes to literacy are limited not by technology but rather by our ability to adapt and acquire the new literacies that emerge" (Yancey, 816).

Yancey, K (2011). Writing as a mode of learning. In V. Villnueva & K. Arola (Eds.), Cross-talk in Comp Theory (pp. 791-826). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Review of Mariel’s Extended Analysis on Kenneth Bruffee

I chose to review the podcasts created by Mariel on Kenneth Bruffee. Mariel showed a level of mastery of this mode of composition that I hope to emulate in the future revisions of y own assignment. The sound quality and editing was superb, and the introductory music was a great touch. One thing that I noticed in Amelia’s podcast, that I failed to do in mine also, is to introduce the speaker’s background. I think that introducing yourself as a graduate student and teacher would be a good touch, and may engage the listener and reassure them of your experience in this field.

Kenneth Bruffee’s background was discussed in a great amount of detail in part one. I found the historical context to be very interesting and a good way to introduce how his ideas were different than those of previous generations.  In particular, I found the link between open admissions and his ideas about knowledge to be very enlightening, especially after reading his article “Collaborative Learning and the ‘Conversation of Mankind.’” It is not hard to see where the concept of abnormal discourse originates. One suggestion that I would make is to add a brief discussion about abnormal discourse and how this connects to his idea that knowledge is something that changes.

I also feel that the third section gave a good overview of how Bruffee affected the field as a whole and his impact on composition theory. I think that this section could be expanded to include your personal teaching experience. Part three would benefit greatly from a description of how you see the work of Bruffee in your classroom, and how collaborative learning is perceived and/or viewed in the high school environment today. You could also describe how you see the legacy of Bruffee reflected in our current classroom situation. For example, the assignment of blogs and our review of each other’s work in these blogs is a direct reflection of Bruffee’s ideas.

MOO or Skype?

There are definite advantages to utilizing the latest technology in the classroom. It can offer students their first experience with new technology and make them more "tech savvy." In this debate, the question is whether MOO (a fifteen year-old technology with text-only capabilities) can offer more to the classroom experience than Skype (the latest in video communication technology). I tend to lean on the side of the text-only technology for two reasons: first, it forces students to communicate their ideas in written form both quickly and effectively. Second, it offers students a "safe" environment where everyone can communicate anonymously.

As we have read from several writers so far in our assigned readings, writing requires practice and the more a person writes, the more experience they gain in communicating ideas. In an age where email is the primary form of professional communication, it is more important than ever to be able to communicate nonverbally. Further, Janet Emig in "Writing as a Mode of Learning" claims that writing is a unique form of learning in that it develops higher cognitive functions by utilizing the skills of "analysis and synthesis." The same cannot be said of verbal communication, which does not require the same focus on content, syntax, grammar, etc.

It is also easy for students to remain anonymous in a text-only environment. Anonymity in the classroom can be advantageous by allowing students to be known for their ideas, and not physical appearance or other identifying factors. Michael Spitzer claims that nonverbal communication in the classroom ensures that "those people with powerful ideas will have more influence than those with powerful personalities." The text-only environment removes evidence of social and political differences, and allows the student's work to be experienced on a level playing field.

While video-conferencing and Skype-like technologies have their benefit and uses, I do not think that the classroom is always the best place for them. In this course, where the students are expected to move into a teaching role in the near future, the MOO system offers a unique opportunity for us to develop the skill of getting to know each other through our writing. This is a valuable skill because one-on-one time between student and teacher is often limited, and getting to know the students personally can be challenging.

Emig, J. (2011). Writing as a mode of learning. In V. Villnueva & K. Arola (Eds.), Cross-talk in Comp Theory (pp. 7-15). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. 

Spitzer, M. (1986). Writing style in computer conferences. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communications, 29, 19-22. 

Teaching Assignments based on my Teaching Philosophy

In last week’s blog post I emphasize the mimetic and rhetorical philosophies of education. I would add to this that the aim would also be to foster a strong sense of ownership in the students. Students would be encouraged to contribute to the direction of the course and to find connections between their interests and the topics they choose to write about. James Britton discusses the importance of this exchange in “Writing and Reading in the Classroom.” Britton indicates that teachers should allow students to be the focus of the class, and that methods that are easy to teach are generally teacher-centered practices that place convenience over pedagogical value.



In order to achieve a classroom environment that encourages a student-centered pedagogy I would assign weekly journal entries. The journals would be written by the student with the teacher as the intended audience. According to Britton, this approach encourages dialogue between both parties of the learning process. It gives students the opportunity to write about a topic that is close to them, and allows the teacher to respond individually, and to raise questions, or suggest new directions in a non-threatening environment.



In order to encourage the mimetic philosophy of composition, which emphasizes research and knowledge of subject matter, I would assign research papers. Students would be allowed to choose a topic that interests them, but it would be required to be a topic that is fairly controversial. The first paper would allow the students to write from whichever perspective they choose. A second assignment would then be to write a paper on the same topic, but to present a different perspective. This activity would teach research skills and teach students to research and consider more than a single perspective.



The rhetorical philosophy would be conveyed through the final assignment. The course objective would be to enable students to identify and tailor a message to a specific audience. For this assignment students would be allowed to choose a written work, either a journal article, newspaper article, or another publication that interests them, and they would be required to identify the target audience and how the author directed the message to maximize the effect on that audience.



I would avoid assignments that emphasized the modes of discourse. After reading more about this approach to teaching composition, I feel that the modes of discourse place too much emphasis on the final product. The modes do not provide sufficient insight into how writing occurs. Robert Connors discusses the shortcomings of the modes in “The Rise and Fall of the Modes of Discourse.” He said that “they turn the attention of both teacher and student toward an academic exercise instead of toward a meaningful act of communication in a social context.”



Britton, J. (1988). Writing and reading in the classroom. In CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF READINGA READING RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER REPORT (pp. 1-21). Retrieved from http://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/17633/ctrstreadtechrepv01988i00425_opt.pdf?sequence=1



Connors, R. (1981). The rise and fall of the modes of discourse. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 444-455. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/356607

Philosophy of Teaching Composition

There is clearly not a one-size fits all philosophy to composition. Theories abound, as our readings have demonstrated. With all of these theories it can all become very confusing, which appears to be one major issue in the composition classroom. One of the worst experiences in academia is to be taught one thing, but to be graded according to another set of standards entirely. I am sure that we have all been in these situations. Fulkerson talks about this phenomenon in his paper "Four Philosophies of Composition." He describes this confusion of pedagogical style and evaluative methodology as "modal confusion." This occurs when, for example, a course is taught with an emphasis on developing logical arguments (mimetic), but the grade is assigned based on grammatical accuracy (formative).

I would say that my teaching philosophy would incorporate mimetic and rhetorical philosophies of composition.  Mimetic, in the sense that knowledge of the subject is essential in almost all forms of composition. The most obvious exceptions would be works of fiction, or poetry, where detachment from reality is part of the desired effect. You can see the influence of the mimetic philosophy in almost every branch of academia. This is why students are taught the importance of research, and how to explore both sides of any problem. It is not sufficient to study only the side that you wish to promulgate.

While knowledge of the subject matter is very important, it is also important to remember that you should tailor your message to the audience, this is the rhetorical philosophy of composition. Knowing your audience can influence what is emphasized by the writer. People tend to pay more attention to things that "hit close to home." In psychology they discuss this  as a theory of proximity. It is the reason why a newsworthy tragedy from Africa must be much more catastrophic than a tragedy in Alabama. It is in our nature to care more about the things that could potentially affect us personally. It is just smart writing to bear this tendency in mind.

Knowing your teaching philosophy is only the first step. It is important to analyze your teaching methods to ensure that they are consistent with your methods of evaluation. James Berlin sums up his paper "Contemporary Composition: The Major Pedagogical Theories" by saying "the test of one's competence as a composition instructor ... resides in being able to recognize and justify the version of the process being taught, complete with all its significance for the student."

Week 2: What is the most difficult thing to teach in the teaching of writing, and how do you go about teaching that?

Having never taught a writing course before, I feel that answering this week’s prompt is particularly challenging. Instead of attempting to transpose myself into the shoes of a teacher, I intend to share what I have observed as a writing student. In the past, I have struggled in classrooms that utilize audio or tactile styles of teaching. As a visual learner, I rely heavily on seeing examples, and writing notes. The learning style of the student can affect how they learn and how they compose. For example, an audio learner may draft by speaking their thoughts out loud several times before writing, while a visual learner may rely more heavily on a written outline.

The drafting process is a good example of how the different learning styles affect composition. I have been told that one should begin with the conclusion, or one should write a detailed summary, or a vague outline … and many other suggestions! The problem is that some people can think of an idea and immediately sit down and write, while others need the structure of an outline or summary to use as a road map for their work. Composition courses should encourage students to identify a drafting process that matches their learning and writing style.

In a composition course, students should be exposed to a variety of drafting methods, and they should be allowed to pick the method that suits them best. Sondra Perl (1978) explores the composition process and the steps that a student takes from idea to product, in “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” This study revealed that students, who had previously been labeled as remedial, had a more sophisticated writing process than previously thought. This is important, because if the writing process can be identified and understood, there is a greater chance that the process can be improved. I think the most difficult challenge for teachers of composition (and teachers in general) is finding a teaching method that reaches all students regardless of their learning style.

Week 1

I am currently employed as a pre-award grant proposal analyst in the Office of Research Services at Texas Tech University. A grant proposal analyst assists faculty and staff in the preparation and submission of all types of research proposals: federal, state, local, non-profit, and industry. Each sponsor utilizes different guidelines, different terms and conditions, and different submission platforms, which make each submission unique and challenging. I have been employed in this role since January 2011, and yet I am still encountering new and challenging tasks on an almost daily basis. It is because of the variety and challenging nature of my work that I have decided to pursue a career in proposal administration. It is my goal to move from my current position to a management role within the same field, which will require the completion of a graduate degree, and at least three years of relevant experience. It is my hope that, by December 2013, I will have achieved both of these milestones.

Broadly defined, composition is the act of creating a product from various parts. This could refer to the act of composing a musical ensemble with a variety of instruments, or a written work from various ideas and concepts. When discussing composition and the written word, composition can be described as the authorship process whereby the original concept is transformed into prose and formatted into a finished product.