next »

[doggrrl]

I'm teaching a pre-canned history of women's literature class for a CC, and almost every post I'm getting is "X is such an inspirational writer! She had such a hard life! Blah, blah, blah. I would not have stood for being treated like that!" (although they usually spell it "aspirational" writer). No matter what I say, I cannot get them to move beyond the facts of the writer's lives and focus on the work as literature.

If I teach this next semester, I'm going to try to intercept this with some (hopefully) preventative warnings. But I'm ready to scream. They love the women who suffered and had hard lives, and I can't get them to NOT judge fictional characters for actions (like everyone stating that the woman who commits suicide at the end of "The Awakening" is selfish for leaving her children). I just keep thinking this is the Oprah Effect: all we as a society can do is talk about our emotions or reactions to things. I am also going to begin class with a quick "how to do analysis" lesson too. I realize these kids have probably not been taught how to do analysis. Does anyone else have any suggestions? I do have the book, Writing Analytically, but I do not choose the texts for the course.

Second question: This is not a composition class, but I'm taking off points if students do not write their responses in complete sentences. A student complained about that. Surely that cannot be unusual in a literature class.

[concordancia]

The easy part first: Demand complete sentences. It turns out it isn't standard, but that doesn't mean it isn't fair.

As for the analysis, I walk them through it with lots of exercises all semester long. The first writing assignment might be "What do you think," but after that, their opinions are forbidden. Given them a list of guiding questions that can be applied to any text. What does this text teach us about the social context in which it was written?

Alternatively, you could ask them to write down their own judgement of a character, then ask if the text itself seems to offer the same judgement or if the text is more sympathetic than they are. Why might this be? Does the action I am judging have any symbolic value? This line of questioning allows them to get their judgement out there, but asks them to move beyond it. You could come up with a list of common opinions, so that if a common response is "I wouldn't stand for it" the trigger question could be "What choice did women of that time have?" or "Why do some people put up with abuse?"

Are these online forums? You could create two for each text - they are required to post in the analysis forum, but they are welcome to post their personal opinions in a separate, book club forum. Any post in the analysis forum to which you respond "This belongs in the book club" does not count toward the required posting count.

[polly_mer]

Second question: This is not a composition class, but I'm taking off points if students do not write their responses in complete sentences. A student complained about that. Surely that cannot be unusual in a literature class.

Grading for simple writing mechanics isn't that unusual in even math and science classes in my experience.  When a student complains, I say, "You took all those English classes to learn to communicate.  Now is the time to use them".

As for teaching students to analyze, examples and a ton of feedback on lots of low-stake work seem to be the most effective mechanisms.  I don't do anything as complex as you likely do, but I keep hammering on students to learn to summarize (a person who cannot summarize likely cannot analyze) and to then discuss implications of what they read.  As Concordancia mentioned, I ask the students leading questions like "Where could you use this information?", "How is this the same or different as something else we read on a related topic?", and "What question would you like to ask the author that can't be answered by reading this particular piece?  Can we read something else and possibly learn the answer?"

I think you have to lead the students by nose in this case or else you will only get emotional reactions.

[proftowanda]

I saw the same thing, teaching women's history -- as I saw in classroom discussions, too.  I understand.  Readings had similar impact upon me, the first time (and sometimes, still, every time) that I read them.  I wanted to rage, rage, against . . . etc.

However, in the classroom, I could stop the problem asap, explaining why it is a problem.  Not so online, until I instituted instructions that echo my classroom instructions in differentiating between thinking and feeling, between thoughts and feelings. 

I say that feelings are fine, but that I would not think of grading them, as they are feelings.  Feelings are to be affirmed.  Fine; I affirm your feelings, students.  But there is a difference between affirmation and education.

So students are instructed that they are required, for a grade, to follow the detailed instructions as to how to read, think about, and write a response to the readings and/or to each other's responses.  Instructions include a minimum number of words, btw (as well as citations, limits on quotations, etc.).

Then, and only then, they can emote at the end of their responses.

Enforce this the first time with a few zeroes for those not meeting the minimum number of words that are rational, thoughtful responses to the readings.

Done.

(And yes, the grading rubric also spells out how many points per response are allocated for communicating thoughts, i.e., writing skills.  So, yes, some get minus zeroes, a real wake-up call.)

[zuzu_]

I teach freshpeep/s'more lit classes online.

Make sure you have clear expectations in the syllabus. I include a rubric, which lets the students know exactly what I'm looking for. Additionally, I have something like this posted in the FAQs section of the course:

How can I get a better grade in discussions?

Here are some tips for improving your discussion grade:

Read the syllabus. There is a detailed guide to discussion grading criteria. Print it out, and keep it handy.

Go beyond the obvious. The best students point out fresh, complex ideas that may not have occurred to other students or even to me. One way to do this is to “create your own” discussion topics.  Do not merely summarize texts, as it assumed that everyone has already completed the reading.

SHOW that you understand the non-literary readings. Use information from the introductions, assigned critical articles, and biographical blurbs to supplement your analysis.

Use quotes from the text. Anytime you make a claim, you need to back it up with evidence from the text. When you supply a quote, include the page number, and thoroughly explain how and why the quote is relevant to the point you are making

Meaningfully engage with other students. This means that you can’t save all of your discussion for (due date) night. Stay engaged in back-and-forth discussion with classmates several times throughout the week.  Make sure you READ other students’ replies so that you aren’t repeating the same ideas. When replying to another student’s post, make sure you try to advance the discussion. Don’t merely “agree.”

Meet the word count requirements. To get a “B” or higher, you should have a minimum of around XXX words written in each forum. (Although keep in mind that quality is even more important than quantity.)

If you would like more specific feedback on how to improve YOUR grade in particular, send me a message, and I’d be happy to help clarify your strengths and weaknesses thus far.

[academic_cog]

I do have the book, Writing Analytically, but I do not choose the texts for the course.

Totally derailing this thread for a moment:  Have you taught from this book? Is it any good? Are there any other forumites who have used it and have opinions on if it is useful in whole or in part?

Getting sorta back to the topic: have you tried posting specific questions students need to engage with, or is it an open thread for each reading? Perhaps drop in a quote or paragraph from some scholarly history or women's studies analysis of power relations in the opening post and ask students to connect that analysis to some specific thing or character or pattern that occurs in the reading.

[snowbound]

I think Writing Analytically is great.  I don't teach from it per se, as it is too advanced for most of the students in my comp classes, but I've learnt a lot from it in terms of how to explain things like strengthening a thesis or doing a comparison that is analytical.

As for the emotional reactions, I think they are fine and I give my students a chance to express them. And then we move beyond that to analysis.   Students do need a lot of guidance and examples of analysis, as it's intellectually demanding and doesn't come naturally to most.  Close reading is one way to get students into an analytical mode. This can come right out students'  gut reaction: "OK, so a number of you feel X about the scene.  How do the author's word choices lead us to feel X? Look at how she's using figurative language to get us to feel this. For example, why this sentence [blah, blah, blah]?"   I often have students meet in groups with very specific tasks.  "How does the language of this paragraph  reflect the central ideas of Heart of Darkness that we've been talking about?" Then they have to report back to the whole class--which means the group has to stay on task.

Students often react to characters as if they were real people, rather than something invented by an author.  Again, starting from that reaction, I try to move beyond it.  "OK, so you dislike the accountant, although the narrator admires him so much. What is the author doing to get you to react this way? Is the narrator's judgement reliable?  Is there some symbolic significance her regarding race or imperialism?"   Or , to use another novel . . .  "OK, so we all like Sethe.  So why did the author chose to depict a child-murderer in such a way that we like her?  Why can we forgive Sethe? Why can't she forgive herself? What's the author suggesting here about slavery?" 

So I guess my main point is, let students react on that gut level.  Most literature tries evoke to such emotions--it's where a lot of the pleasure of reading come from. They are not your enemy!  In fact, those feelings are what will give at least some of your students the motivation to try to understand the text better through (with your help) thinking about it. 

[proftowanda]

I think Writing Analytically is great.  I don't teach from it per se, as it is too advanced for most of the students in my comp classes, but I've learnt a lot from it in terms of how to explain things like strengthening a thesis or doing a comparison that is analytical.

As for the emotional reactions, I think they are fine and I give my students a chance to express them. And then we move beyond that to analysis.   Students do need a lot of guidance and examples of analysis, as it's intellectually demanding and doesn't come naturally to most.  Close reading is one way to get students into an analytical mode. This can come right out students'  gut reaction: "OK, so a number of you feel X about the scene.  How do the author's word choices lead us to feel X? Look at how she's using figurative language to get us to feel this. For example, why this sentence [blah, blah, blah]?"   I often have students meet in groups with very specific tasks.  "How does the language of this paragraph  reflect the central ideas of Heart of Darkness that we've been talking about?" Then they have to report back to the whole class--which means the group has to stay on task.

Students often react to characters as if they were real people, rather than something invented by an author.  Again, starting from that reaction, I try to move beyond it.  "OK, so you dislike the accountant, although the narrator admires him so much. What is the author doing to get you to react this way? Is the narrator's judgement reliable?  Is there some symbolic significance her regarding race or imperialism?"   Or , to use another novel . . .  "OK, so we all like Sethe.  So why did the author chose to depict a child-murderer in such a way that we like her?  Why can we forgive Sethe? Why can't she forgive herself? What's the author suggesting here about slavery?" 

So I guess my main point is, let students react on that gut level.  Most literature tries evoke to such emotions--it's where a lot of the pleasure of reading come from. They are not your enemy!  In fact, those feelings are what will give at least some of your students the motivation to try to understand the text better through (with your help) thinking about it. 

Agreed -- and a way to deal with this (for me; heck, I cry not just at movies but when reading good books:-) or with learning to analyze any form of writing (nonfiction, too, whether history or journalism or etcetera) is not a way that some students want to be told:  Reread.  Read the first time through for the story line and emote; read another time through more analytically to figure out how the writer manipulated your emotions.

When I taught in a professional writing program, students were less resistant to rereading, as they wanted to be professional writers; that is, they understood that they had to learn to be not just consumers of writing but how to be producers of writing (preferably, they hoped, for profit -- so they had that incentive).

Motivating other sorts of students with other aspirations to read the readings at all, much less twice or more, is far more difficult.  Sometimes, it has helped to make it a deductive exercise, acting almost like detectives solving the mystery of how we can be manipulated as readers.  Your questions would do that well -- as I have learned I have to do in helping students to analyze nonfiction, too.  That is, when I was a young 'un starting out at this, I too often asked the open-ended sorts of questions but also had to become more directive, as you do . . . and I have to do so again and again, for more students to start to see the light. 

[infopri]

I don't teach literature, but yes, every semester I struggle to teach my students the difference between descriptive writing and the analytic writing that my course requires.  And I forbid any discussion of "feelings."  Here are just a few of the tactics I use:

1) A section-by-section description of what their papers should contain and how it should be presented.

2) An (anonymized) example of an A paper from a prior semester.

3) Repeated explanations throughout the semester--in lecture and in the instructions for writing their papers--of the difference between description and analysis.

4) Reinforcement of this distinction in the class discussions, especially whenever someone offers description as analysis.

5) In the syllabus and in class, I warn them not to use the words "I feel."  They are out of place in a class like mine.  They may offer opinions, but they'd darn well better be informed and supported by evidence, or I'll treat them like feelings.

6) One-on-one conversations (via an instant-message type of feature) as needed to help those students who still don't get it, particular as they prepare to write their papers.

Most of them eventually get it, but many of them never do.  Oh, and by the way--these are master's-degree students!