next »

[wakingtime]

I'm thinking about structuring my class next semester with texts about learning and/or professionalism (obviously, I have no idea which) rather than the traditional reader we use that students don't really connect with or understand.

On one hand, I feel like I am dumbing down the curriculum ...

I'm not concerned about the "dumbing down" so much as a spin you can put on it to interest the students. If you tell them, "You're studying learning and professionalism," their enthusiasm may be lower than, "This semester you'll learn how to develop your X [mind or something]." Just a thought.

[present_mirth]

I've been structuring my comp courses around a "welcome to college" theme for years, and it doesn't get old nearly as fast as you'd think.  Most of the students seem to have no problem with an entire course about university education.  (I try to keep the assignments varied and cover a lot of territory -- everything from analyzing representations of college life in the movies to researching a contemporary issue of the student's choice, as long as it affects the college community in some way.)

A few readings that I use:

Jack Meiland, The Difference Between High School and College

William Cronon, Only Connect: The Goals of a Liberal Education

Caroline Bird, College is a Waste of Time and Money (for a contrarian view -- I might try something a little more contemporary next time around, since an updated version of her argument seems to be in fashion now)

And there are a ton of short pieces from the Chronicle or Inside Higher Ed that work well with this sort of theme.

[mountainguy]

I like Present_Mirth's approach to expanding the learning theme to the culture of college in general. There's a lot of provocative material out there.

As for this point:

At my institution, we are not "supposed" to teach grammar per se. The claim is that's what our writing center is for.

This is the most absurd idea I've ever heard. What are you supposed to do?? Keep marking the same mistakes again and again? It sounds like a case of "writing centers gone wild."

[polly_mer]

At my institution, we are not "supposed" to teach grammar per se. The claim is that's what our writing center is for.

This is the most absurd idea I've ever heard. What are you supposed to do?? Keep marking the same mistakes again and again? It sounds like a case of "writing centers gone wild."

I'll admit that I have backed off this semester on marking grammatical mistakes and starting putting "Take this to the writing center to get individual help" for the people who need a lot of help in that area.  On the other hand, I am in no way formally tasked with teaching composition at any level.  However, since my science for teachers classes are mostly qualitative science (i.e., writing essays and reports to explain instead of doing lots of math problems), I do have a moral responsibility to enforce standards on communication and that means holding the line on using standard English (informal is ok, but errors are not) and logic, which means composition in the best sense. 

Therefore, I understand the logic that the point of a composition class is to learn to organize, explain, and present ideas, not to focus on sentence-level grammar.   In most cases, simply trying to provide enough feedback to the mass of students in multiple sections on those points will take all of a comp professor's time.  Thus, instead of dividing the effort, the idea is that the folks at the writing center will give the individual tutoring to fix the sentence level mistakes. 

[cathwen]

At my institution, we are not "supposed" to teach grammar per se. The claim is that's what our writing center is for.

This is the most absurd idea I've ever heard. What are you supposed to do?? Keep marking the same mistakes again and again? It sounds like a case of "writing centers gone wild."

About grammar:  Back in the late 60s/early 70s when I was an undergrad, I took education courses to get certification to teach high school in my field.  The very worst was a course called "Introduction to Secondary Education".  I remember my jaw dropping when our professor--an older guy who was trying to be hip--said, "Don't teach grammar.  It's boring.  Just rap!" 

I never did end up teaching high school, but my daughter is a high school English teacher.  She writes extremely well and her command of grammar is excellent.  She's fighting the good fight in her classes, but the state curriculum does not allow for nearly as much grammar instruction as her students need.  She does her best, though.

[elsie]

Exactly. Teaching grammar only ends up being effective if it's done individually in the context of the student's own writing. Put sentences with errors in front of students? They can correct them. But you will still see that exact same error that student corrected in the student's own writing. They rarely transfer what they can do with worksheets into their own composing process.

Also, a major aspect of learning grammar (as opposed to teaching it) is constant exposure to professionally edited prose. Many of our students are reluctant readers who skim rather than really reading in a focused manner. The more one reads, the more one absorbs effective language use.

[lilyteach]

Thanks so much for all the good feedback. I need to select books or not by next week, so I'll need to sort through it all.

I've had the most success teaching one grammar issue to the class in a very short mini-lesson (5 minutes) and then making them go through the drafts and find the error. At this level, everyone has a comma splice, run-on, etc. Then they highlight it and correct it. I walk around and spend time with each student on finding/correcting. Then I deduct one point for each time a comma splice (or whatever we covered) shows up on the next paper. It works pretty well.

I'd also like feedback on portfolios/grading. I'm thinking of going to a portfolio system next semester too as I feel like the students are disconnected from the process and are writing for a grade. I do three rough drafts and then a final. The three drafts are completion grades, but most don't put much effort into them. Then the final drafts aren't great because they haven't really gone through the process. Does anyone have a system that works well? I'm super overloaded by grading final drafts, but I feel like I should be doing more grading/commenting on earlier drafts and very little on the final draft. Does that make sense?

[concordancia]

There is a reason that so many comp classes become intro to lit classes. OK, there are a couple of them, but one is that reading helps us become better writers. I do avoid turning my comp classes into lit classes, but I do use all kinds of readings. When we are working on description, we read fictional descriptions and odes, as well creative non-fiction. However, we don't analyze the literature, qua literature. We focus on vocabulary and techniques (yes, that is one way of analyzing literature).

[wakingtime]

There is a reason that so many comp classes become intro to lit classes. OK, there are a couple of them, but one is that reading helps us become better writers. I do avoid turning my comp classes into lit classes, but I do use all kinds of readings. When we are working on description, we read fictional descriptions and odes, as well creative non-fiction. However, we don't analyze the literature, qua literature. We focus on vocabulary and techniques (yes, that is one way of analyzing literature).

I'm turning sour on lit in comp because of the students who skip the reading and opt for the Sparknotes instead. They're a minority, but it drives me crazy. I'm experimenting next term with short pieces from recent periodicals.

[polly_mer]

I'd also like feedback on portfolios/grading. I'm thinking of going to a portfolio system next semester too as I feel like the students are disconnected from the process and are writing for a grade. I do three rough drafts and then a final. The three drafts are completion grades, but most don't put much effort into them. Then the final drafts aren't great because they haven't really gone through the process. Does anyone have a system that works well? I'm super overloaded by grading final drafts, but I feel like I should be doing more grading/commenting on earlier drafts and very little on the final draft. Does that make sense?

Yes, it makes sense to me to grade/comment on early drafts so that students can revise the drafts and improve based on the feedback.  Then, the final paper just gets a grade with checkboxes on the rubric and maybe one summary comment to indicate why the paper earned that grade.

<continued disclaimer that I teach science, but writing and composition are important means to the end of student learning this material in a way that makes me confident that they could teach it to their students>

I've been experimenting with doing several little assignments (1 page each) through the semester of the various kinds of writing that students need to do in this class.  These are not completion assignments; I grade the snot out of them and comment on everything including grammar, logic, and science.  However, each one only counts for 10 points, which works out to something like one-tenth of 1 percent of the final grade. 

Then, I have students put together a draft of their portfolio, which has several of each type of the little assignments.  That draft is also 10 points, but an overall 10% of the final portfolio so 1% of the final grade.  For that portfolio draft, I grade on everything to check boxes on the rubric, but I don't comment on individual errors other than the science.  Grammar gets a low grade on the rubric, but the only comment is "Go to the writing center and get help with your sentence-level writing mechanics".  I comment on each piece as to logic, clarity, paraphrasing that is plagiarism, and science, but I don't attempt to fix the problems in every piece.  Instead, I provide tips and suggestions on one piece and say, "Do something similar for the other pieces.  Come see me or visit the writing center if you want to discuss particulars for a given piece".

I tried grading on completion for the draft assignments last year.  As you found, students don't take the drafts seriously so I have to hit them where they live with actual grades.  Since I can do the math, I know that getting a 3 on one practice assignment has no affect on the final grade, but students do now take the practice seriously so that I get pretty good (i.e., few less than C) final submissions.

[prytania3]

Exactly. Teaching grammar only ends up being effective if it's done individually in the context of the student's own writing. Put sentences with errors in front of students? They can correct them. But you will still see that exact same error that student corrected in the student's own writing. They rarely transfer what they can do with worksheets into their own composing process.

Also, a major aspect of learning grammar (as opposed to teaching it) is constant exposure to professionally edited prose. Many of our students are reluctant readers who skim rather than really reading in a focused manner. The more one reads, the more one absorbs effective language use.

You know, that's the pap that's been fed to everyone from the PhD rhet/comp people, and I don't believe it for one minute. I have *never* had a student who thoroughly knows grammar who is a bad writer. Maybe the student's not Tolstoy, but the student is always competent.

I teach grammar in comp. I teach the parts of speech, I teach dependent clauses, I teach punctuation, and if nothing else, it makes them look at their sentences more closely because they understand that a sentence is more than just "a complete thought."

They need to bring diagramming back in K-12. The only schools that seem to be teaching it are Christian schools--The Catholics have even  bowed out.

[embitteredhistorian]

Exactly. Teaching grammar only ends up being effective if it's done individually in the context of the student's own writing. Put sentences with errors in front of students? They can correct them. But you will still see that exact same error that student corrected in the student's own writing. They rarely transfer what they can do with worksheets into their own composing process.

Also, a major aspect of learning grammar (as opposed to teaching it) is constant exposure to professionally edited prose. Many of our students are reluctant readers who skim rather than really reading in a focused manner. The more one reads, the more one absorbs effective language use.

You know, that's the pap that's been fed to everyone from the PhD rhet/comp people, and I don't believe it for one minute. I have *never* had a student who thoroughly knows grammar who is a bad writer. Maybe the student's not Tolstoy, but the student is always competent.

I teach grammar in comp. I teach the parts of speech, I teach dependent clauses, I teach punctuation, and if nothing else, it makes them look at their sentences more closely because they understand that a sentence is more than just "a complete thought."

They need to bring diagramming back in K-12. The only schools that seem to be teaching it are Christian schools--The Catholics have even  bowed out.

I don't teach comp, but yes. This makes so much sense to me. I can't imagine how anyone could disagree with this unless they had some pedagogical axe to grind.

[concordancia]

Exactly. Teaching grammar only ends up being effective if it's done individually in the context of the student's own writing. Put sentences with errors in front of students? They can correct them. But you will still see that exact same error that student corrected in the student's own writing. They rarely transfer what they can do with worksheets into their own composing process.

Also, a major aspect of learning grammar (as opposed to teaching it) is constant exposure to professionally edited prose. Many of our students are reluctant readers who skim rather than really reading in a focused manner. The more one reads, the more one absorbs effective language use.

You know, that's the pap that's been fed to everyone from the PhD rhet/comp people, and I don't believe it for one minute. I have *never* had a student who thoroughly knows grammar who is a bad writer. Maybe the student's not Tolstoy, but the student is always competent.

I teach grammar in comp. I teach the parts of speech, I teach dependent clauses, I teach punctuation, and if nothing else, it makes them look at their sentences more closely because they understand that a sentence is more than just "a complete thought."

They need to bring diagramming back in K-12. The only schools that seem to be teaching it are Christian schools--The Catholics have even  bowed out.

I don't teach comp, but yes. This makes so much sense to me. I can't imagine how anyone could disagree with this unless they had some pedagogical axe to grind.

Because I do teach composition courses. As Elsie suggested, I have plenty of students who can fill out worksheets correctly nearly 100% of the time, who can proofread common errors that I put in front of them, but who do not transfer that knowledge into their writing.

I do, however, agree that grammar is something that should be taught earlier. I think a large part of what I am seeing is that they need more than one semester to process this.

[embitteredhistorian]

Exactly. Teaching grammar only ends up being effective if it's done individually in the context of the student's own writing. Put sentences with errors in front of students? They can correct them. But you will still see that exact same error that student corrected in the student's own writing. They rarely transfer what they can do with worksheets into their own composing process.

Also, a major aspect of learning grammar (as opposed to teaching it) is constant exposure to professionally edited prose. Many of our students are reluctant readers who skim rather than really reading in a focused manner. The more one reads, the more one absorbs effective language use.

You know, that's the pap that's been fed to everyone from the PhD rhet/comp people, and I don't believe it for one minute. I have *never* had a student who thoroughly knows grammar who is a bad writer. Maybe the student's not Tolstoy, but the student is always competent.

I teach grammar in comp. I teach the parts of speech, I teach dependent clauses, I teach punctuation, and if nothing else, it makes them look at their sentences more closely because they understand that a sentence is more than just "a complete thought."

They need to bring diagramming back in K-12. The only schools that seem to be teaching it are Christian schools--The Catholics have even  bowed out.

I don't teach comp, but yes. This makes so much sense to me. I can't imagine how anyone could disagree with this unless they had some pedagogical axe to grind.

Because I do teach composition courses. As Elsie suggested, I have plenty of students who can fill out worksheets correctly nearly 100% of the time, who can proofread common errors that I put in front of them, but who do not transfer that knowledge into their writing.

Or, do they write their essays in an hour and are too lazy/apathetic to bother editing it?

[academic_cog]

I've been structuring my comp courses around a "welcome to college" theme for years, and it doesn't get old nearly as fast as you'd think.  Most of the students seem to have no problem with an entire course about university education.  (I try to keep the assignments varied and cover a lot of territory -- everything from analyzing representations of college life in the movies to researching a contemporary issue of the student's choice, as long as it affects the college community in some way.)

A few readings that I use:

Jack Meiland, The Difference Between High School and College

William Cronon, Only Connect: The Goals of a Liberal Education

Caroline Bird, College is a Waste of Time and Money (for a contrarian view -- I might try something a little more contemporary next time around, since an updated version of her argument seems to be in fashion now)

And there are a ton of short pieces from the Chronicle or Inside Higher Ed that work well with this sort of theme.

Bookmarking these! These are good. I just recently used Mark Pittman, "College: An Overpriced Monopoly" and "Plan B: Skip College" as well as some articles about the value of a liberal arts education that weren't as strong of arguments as I had thought when I first read them. Our reader had an annoying piece by the Bell Curve dude about why some people are better suited to vocational school than college that has some zingers about class that got my students riled up, in a good way. I'd love to see some good short pieces about the value of going away to college vs. staying close to home/at home, since my students kept returning to the topic in regards to college being a "learning experience" vs all about course content --- anybody have any suggestions?

I also did some stuff with ethics and cheating, and also used a Chronicle article on why college should be about teaching college students values, which I then got to weave in with our introduction to Why Plagiarism Is Bad day. *mwahahahaha!*

As for grammar --- meh. I find it "takes" best in one-on-one tutoring, and I have so much on my plate trying to get students to recognize when they are directly contradicting themselves, or not making any arguable claims, or desperately padding to make a single thought run three pages, that I don't bother working my way down to the minor grammar stuff.