Every year I do conferences I am struck by what a useful practice it is. I learned many things about my students today, including that they are not bogged down by what I saw as messiness last week: several mentioned (unprompted) how last week's classes helped them think about writing. Phew (so far).
Several students were so relieved that we were having a nice conversation about writing that they shook my hand or thanked me after the conference (they said they had been really nervous).
Things that came up in conversations today: drafting strategies, reading strategies for difficult texts, outlining from drafts, MLA citation, keeping a calendar.
More meetings tomorrow . . .
Monday, October 25, 2010
Thursday, October 21, 2010
The messy time
Another messy day. Just trying to remind myself this happens almost every term and the messiness is productive. It will all come together.
Okay, this day's plan was fueled by the assignment I wrote for I.2. Here's the assignment:
Due: At mid-term conference
Minimum 4 pages, double-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman
We have now read two essays by writers grappling with issues related to how identity intersects with community, family, and education. Both Wideman and Anzaldua use writerly moves to enhance their explorations of these issues. In this essay please discuss how specific writerly moves in these essays relate to what you see as the writer’s project. You should both describe how the writerly moves specifically function in relation to the project and explain what is at stake for the writer in doing this. What are the potential risks or rewards in undertaking these projects in these ways? What, in the end, do you think about these very different ways of exploring important issues?
You may find that you can build off of what you have already written in Project I.1, although you will need to reframe the essay. Some of may find that you will only use parts of what you have already written or that you need to rethink, extend and revise what you wrote previously.
Please use quotations to build your discussion and make sure you have a “quote sandwich” for each quote. Use MLA parenthetical citation with these quotations. Please also include a works cited page.
Here's the class plan for the day:
Conference Sign up
QW (15): What connections do you see between W’s and A’s projects?
· Discussion
· Wkshop
o Project
o Stake
o Quotations
o Successes, interest
o Other suggestions
· Reflection: How could you use this workshop to help you with I.2?
I hope this qw set up the groundwork for I.2. After they finished writing we had a really good discussion about what they had written with me putting their words on the board. I then had an impulse to hand out the assignment, which I did. We read through it and discussed it. The students asked me to clarify project and stakes again. I asked the students to help me compose a definition, which they did, and I wrote it on the board. One student proposed defining project as theme, which lead me to talking about how you talk about theme. (I hugely regret introducing "theme" into my previous assignment. It ended up springing a kind of trap on the students who used it and were used to h.s. ways of talking about theme as something outside the text: "Wideman talks about the theme of Tragedy Leading to a Downward Spiral.")
In trying to explain the problems associated with the above ways of talking about theme, I decided to ask the students to write a quick plan for themselves in relation to the next essay. I said write something like "I want to know about or talk about x because it is important because of y." This was a spur of the moment idea and as I said it I realized this could also terribly backfire. But, in asking what they wrote it seemed okay, especially since many students did set it up as a question they wanted to look into. I then talked about starting an essay with something you want to know is a great approach.
Since I was already totally off the plan, I segued from this to talking about beginning writing. I said I had noted that many students wrote about their struggles writing the 1st essay because it was hard to write the intro. I talked about writing the intro last (and said it was a secret move of many professional writers). One student suggested essentially freewriting to get started, which was great. I also talked about webbing as a tool for brainstorming. I tried to emphasize that individuals had to discover what works best for them.
Next, we turned to the workshop. I had put the workshop questions on the board and asked them to tell me what we thought writers should do with their quotes and I put this stuff on the board. I very quickly talked about citation and told them to use the handbooks to make sure they were doing this right in their essays.
We read both remaining essays (from last week's packet) aloud. By this time I was really running out of time. After giving them 10 minutes to work on the questions, we only really had 10 minutes to discuss the essay. We debated whether essay 2's scattered approach to having a project was a problem. A student also critiqued the essay writer's informal prose which lead to a discussion about voice and formal vs informal voice and context. This all sounds good now, but it was really rushed in class and messy. I ended the class by saying we were at a messy point but it would be okay. I handed back papers.
I'm feeling like I need a lot more time just to talk with them about their writing.
Okay, this day's plan was fueled by the assignment I wrote for I.2. Here's the assignment:
Due: At mid-term conference
Minimum 4 pages, double-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman
We have now read two essays by writers grappling with issues related to how identity intersects with community, family, and education. Both Wideman and Anzaldua use writerly moves to enhance their explorations of these issues. In this essay please discuss how specific writerly moves in these essays relate to what you see as the writer’s project. You should both describe how the writerly moves specifically function in relation to the project and explain what is at stake for the writer in doing this. What are the potential risks or rewards in undertaking these projects in these ways? What, in the end, do you think about these very different ways of exploring important issues?
You may find that you can build off of what you have already written in Project I.1, although you will need to reframe the essay. Some of may find that you will only use parts of what you have already written or that you need to rethink, extend and revise what you wrote previously.
Please use quotations to build your discussion and make sure you have a “quote sandwich” for each quote. Use MLA parenthetical citation with these quotations. Please also include a works cited page.
Here's the class plan for the day:
Conference Sign up
QW (15): What connections do you see between W’s and A’s projects?
· Discussion
· Wkshop
o Project
o Stake
o Quotations
o Successes, interest
o Other suggestions
· Reflection: How could you use this workshop to help you with I.2?
I hope this qw set up the groundwork for I.2. After they finished writing we had a really good discussion about what they had written with me putting their words on the board. I then had an impulse to hand out the assignment, which I did. We read through it and discussed it. The students asked me to clarify project and stakes again. I asked the students to help me compose a definition, which they did, and I wrote it on the board. One student proposed defining project as theme, which lead me to talking about how you talk about theme. (I hugely regret introducing "theme" into my previous assignment. It ended up springing a kind of trap on the students who used it and were used to h.s. ways of talking about theme as something outside the text: "Wideman talks about the theme of Tragedy Leading to a Downward Spiral.")
In trying to explain the problems associated with the above ways of talking about theme, I decided to ask the students to write a quick plan for themselves in relation to the next essay. I said write something like "I want to know about or talk about x because it is important because of y." This was a spur of the moment idea and as I said it I realized this could also terribly backfire. But, in asking what they wrote it seemed okay, especially since many students did set it up as a question they wanted to look into. I then talked about starting an essay with something you want to know is a great approach.
Since I was already totally off the plan, I segued from this to talking about beginning writing. I said I had noted that many students wrote about their struggles writing the 1st essay because it was hard to write the intro. I talked about writing the intro last (and said it was a secret move of many professional writers). One student suggested essentially freewriting to get started, which was great. I also talked about webbing as a tool for brainstorming. I tried to emphasize that individuals had to discover what works best for them.
Next, we turned to the workshop. I had put the workshop questions on the board and asked them to tell me what we thought writers should do with their quotes and I put this stuff on the board. I very quickly talked about citation and told them to use the handbooks to make sure they were doing this right in their essays.
We read both remaining essays (from last week's packet) aloud. By this time I was really running out of time. After giving them 10 minutes to work on the questions, we only really had 10 minutes to discuss the essay. We debated whether essay 2's scattered approach to having a project was a problem. A student also critiqued the essay writer's informal prose which lead to a discussion about voice and formal vs informal voice and context. This all sounds good now, but it was really rushed in class and messy. I ended the class by saying we were at a messy point but it would be okay. I handed back papers.
I'm feeling like I need a lot more time just to talk with them about their writing.
Confusion!
Okay, so last Wednesday might have been the highpoint of the term. This week has been all downhill. Ahhhh . . . rollercoaster.
Monday was our first day with Anzaldua. Here's what I had planned:
QW: Describe your reaction to this essay. What was the experience of reading it like? What struck you as significant? Where would you want to start our conversation?
Discussion
Then, pairs work on:
· What’s the project?
· What’s at stake?
· What writerly moves do you see here?
· How do the writerly moves relate to her project?
I am now using the same basic set of questions to discuss both the published readings and their own writing.
The conversation was, I guess in retrospect, fine. From their qws we talked about experiences of not knowing Spanish or of knowing Spanish. We talked about why Anzaldua would create these experiences.
Next, I asked them to get in pairs and work on the questions above. I sat with a pair group that included a student I have kept my eye on because he is giving off strong vibes of "I already know everything and don't need to put any effort in." I sat with them for an excruciating 25 minutes, making them accountable for what they said and posing questions that forced them to confront what they didn't know. Blah! (I will say, from the vantage point of Thursday, that Problem Student had a lot less attitude on Wed.)
Finally, we turned to whole group discussion about what they had discussed. It was a lively discussion. The confusion part was that the students were eager to throw around generalizations about "race" and ethnic groups. One of my more vocal white students said things like "it makes me feel sad that other people want to be white. We're not that great." And, "I'm white, so I don't have a culture." Good effing lord -- lots and lots of work for me! I talked about whiteness studies and white privilege and Sonia Sotomayor versus Sam Alito -- whose perspective is seen by a bunch of white men as differently dangerous? Luckily, the student who had prompted her to say the thing about everyone wanting to be white (he talked about his immigrant (Middle Eastern) family "whitewashing" themselves) corrected and challenged her. At one moment I realized we were in danger of talking about whites as a monolith and about the group that doesn't know Spanish as the monolith white. I talked about how significant social, regional, class differences cut across "race" and how people of color who don't know Spanish were being left out of our consideration. Problem Student then piped up angerly that "white" people can know Spanish. To which I responded that was of course true and tried to pull us back to thinking about how Anz prompted this whole discussion re: dominant culture (I phrase I like better since it gets us away from too facile generalizations about "race") and difference.
Messy messy day.
Monday was our first day with Anzaldua. Here's what I had planned:
QW: Describe your reaction to this essay. What was the experience of reading it like? What struck you as significant? Where would you want to start our conversation?
Discussion
Then, pairs work on:
· What’s the project?
· What’s at stake?
· What writerly moves do you see here?
· How do the writerly moves relate to her project?
I am now using the same basic set of questions to discuss both the published readings and their own writing.
The conversation was, I guess in retrospect, fine. From their qws we talked about experiences of not knowing Spanish or of knowing Spanish. We talked about why Anzaldua would create these experiences.
Next, I asked them to get in pairs and work on the questions above. I sat with a pair group that included a student I have kept my eye on because he is giving off strong vibes of "I already know everything and don't need to put any effort in." I sat with them for an excruciating 25 minutes, making them accountable for what they said and posing questions that forced them to confront what they didn't know. Blah! (I will say, from the vantage point of Thursday, that Problem Student had a lot less attitude on Wed.)
Finally, we turned to whole group discussion about what they had discussed. It was a lively discussion. The confusion part was that the students were eager to throw around generalizations about "race" and ethnic groups. One of my more vocal white students said things like "it makes me feel sad that other people want to be white. We're not that great." And, "I'm white, so I don't have a culture." Good effing lord -- lots and lots of work for me! I talked about whiteness studies and white privilege and Sonia Sotomayor versus Sam Alito -- whose perspective is seen by a bunch of white men as differently dangerous? Luckily, the student who had prompted her to say the thing about everyone wanting to be white (he talked about his immigrant (Middle Eastern) family "whitewashing" themselves) corrected and challenged her. At one moment I realized we were in danger of talking about whites as a monolith and about the group that doesn't know Spanish as the monolith white. I talked about how significant social, regional, class differences cut across "race" and how people of color who don't know Spanish were being left out of our consideration. Problem Student then piped up angerly that "white" people can know Spanish. To which I responded that was of course true and tried to pull us back to thinking about how Anz prompted this whole discussion re: dominant culture (I phrase I like better since it gets us away from too facile generalizations about "race") and difference.
Messy messy day.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Day 6: Writing Workshop
I had planned to spend the entire class workshopping 3 essays, but the results of the reviews of reviews from Monday were so uneven that I wanted to spend time on them. So, here is what I did in class:
I started with a qw about the first essay they were turning in·
Qw (20 m): Describe the experience of writing the essay. What surprised or challenged you in writing? How did you meet the challenges that arose? What are you pleased with in the essay? Why? What would you like to work on more and why?
The students turned the qw in with their essays. Next, I pulled up three of the strongest reviews the students had done on Monday and we read them aloud. I said they were extremely good reviews and asked the rest of the class to tell me what they saw the writers doing in them, what was successful. The students talked about the detail the writers used and how the reviews were put together.
None of the students cited their review correctly, so I had sent an email asking them to bring in their writing handbooks (I also put the OWL website info on the board). I realized last year that students don't necessarily realize that EVERYONE looks up citations -- I think they think you are supposed to somehow just know. I also realized many students aren't sure how to use the handbooks, so I had them move through the handbooks as I talked about how they were organized. We moved to the MLA section and I asked them to find the information about how to cite from scholarly journals and periodicals (this also led to a review of the difference between them). Next we talked about what an anthology is and then they looked up the citation for that. The students wanted to know how you know if titles go in quotes or italics. I had them look in the index to find out where to find the info.
After all this business, we started our writing workshop. I introduced the terms I wanted to use for talking about writing (project and "what's at stake"), explaining why I was purposely moving away from the language of thesis. I also explained that I will always bring in strong papers that would allow us to talk about issues facing all the students when we workshopped.
Next, I put on the board what I wanted us to look at in talking about the papers. Here's what I wrote:
o What's the writer's project?
o What's at stake?
o Where are you most interested?
o Where would you like to know more?
o Other suggestions?
We then sat in a circle and students volunteered to read each paragraph of the first essay aloud. After the reading, I gave them about 15 minutes to work through our questions in relation to the paper.
During discussion there were a couple different ways the students named the writer's project. What was so cool is that they would then refer back to B and P's introduction and their point about individual readings.
Overall, there were 3 magically exciting moments to me in this workshop (never happened to me before!):
1. A students said that the essay made her re-see Wideman's essay. I freaked out, shouting, "yes! exactly! That's what we are doing in here, that's why you are writing -- to show all of us in the class, not just me, your take on the reading. Wonderful!"
2. When I asked what they said for what was at stake, a student who is a self-professed English hater said, "This is a really weird thing to ask us to think about. I don't get it. How can there be something at stake?" I freaked out with excitement. I said, "You're right, it does probably seem like a strange thing to ask you to think about. I bet, correct me if I am wrong, that you've never had reason to write something for any other reason than to fulfill a task set by a teacher and get a grade. Is this fair to say? What I am suggesting to you is that now, in university, you are writing because you have something worth saying and that you need to tell your reader why it is worth saying. It is not just a task for a grade." I then talked about how we professors write and in our writing we have to give our readers a reason to read, otherwise why would they keep reading. I said that as university students, the students in the class were in the same position and that this is exciting.
3. A student raised a question during our workshop discussion, saying, "If we are saying that everyone reads differently and has their own interpretation, how do you know your reader will see what you want them to see in your quotes?" SO EXCITING!!! I wasn't even going to talk about quotation today, but there it was organic and framed brillantly! From there I talked about the quote sandwich and telling your reader what you want them to notice in the quote. We then looked at the quotes in the student essay and noticed that one of the most important quotes did not do -- in its content -- what the writer claimed it did. We talked about what the writer would need to revise this.
In the last 5 minutes I asked the students what they could take away from this workshop and they discussed using quotes, saying why what they were doing was significant, etc.
I started with a qw about the first essay they were turning in·
Qw (20 m): Describe the experience of writing the essay. What surprised or challenged you in writing? How did you meet the challenges that arose? What are you pleased with in the essay? Why? What would you like to work on more and why?
The students turned the qw in with their essays. Next, I pulled up three of the strongest reviews the students had done on Monday and we read them aloud. I said they were extremely good reviews and asked the rest of the class to tell me what they saw the writers doing in them, what was successful. The students talked about the detail the writers used and how the reviews were put together.
None of the students cited their review correctly, so I had sent an email asking them to bring in their writing handbooks (I also put the OWL website info on the board). I realized last year that students don't necessarily realize that EVERYONE looks up citations -- I think they think you are supposed to somehow just know. I also realized many students aren't sure how to use the handbooks, so I had them move through the handbooks as I talked about how they were organized. We moved to the MLA section and I asked them to find the information about how to cite from scholarly journals and periodicals (this also led to a review of the difference between them). Next we talked about what an anthology is and then they looked up the citation for that. The students wanted to know how you know if titles go in quotes or italics. I had them look in the index to find out where to find the info.
After all this business, we started our writing workshop. I introduced the terms I wanted to use for talking about writing (project and "what's at stake"), explaining why I was purposely moving away from the language of thesis. I also explained that I will always bring in strong papers that would allow us to talk about issues facing all the students when we workshopped.
Next, I put on the board what I wanted us to look at in talking about the papers. Here's what I wrote:
o What's the writer's project?
o What's at stake?
o Where are you most interested?
o Where would you like to know more?
o Other suggestions?
We then sat in a circle and students volunteered to read each paragraph of the first essay aloud. After the reading, I gave them about 15 minutes to work through our questions in relation to the paper.
During discussion there were a couple different ways the students named the writer's project. What was so cool is that they would then refer back to B and P's introduction and their point about individual readings.
Overall, there were 3 magically exciting moments to me in this workshop (never happened to me before!):
1. A students said that the essay made her re-see Wideman's essay. I freaked out, shouting, "yes! exactly! That's what we are doing in here, that's why you are writing -- to show all of us in the class, not just me, your take on the reading. Wonderful!"
2. When I asked what they said for what was at stake, a student who is a self-professed English hater said, "This is a really weird thing to ask us to think about. I don't get it. How can there be something at stake?" I freaked out with excitement. I said, "You're right, it does probably seem like a strange thing to ask you to think about. I bet, correct me if I am wrong, that you've never had reason to write something for any other reason than to fulfill a task set by a teacher and get a grade. Is this fair to say? What I am suggesting to you is that now, in university, you are writing because you have something worth saying and that you need to tell your reader why it is worth saying. It is not just a task for a grade." I then talked about how we professors write and in our writing we have to give our readers a reason to read, otherwise why would they keep reading. I said that as university students, the students in the class were in the same position and that this is exciting.
3. A student raised a question during our workshop discussion, saying, "If we are saying that everyone reads differently and has their own interpretation, how do you know your reader will see what you want them to see in your quotes?" SO EXCITING!!! I wasn't even going to talk about quotation today, but there it was organic and framed brillantly! From there I talked about the quote sandwich and telling your reader what you want them to notice in the quote. We then looked at the quotes in the student essay and noticed that one of the most important quotes did not do -- in its content -- what the writer claimed it did. We talked about what the writer would need to revise this.
In the last 5 minutes I asked the students what they could take away from this workshop and they discussed using quotes, saying why what they were doing was significant, etc.
Day 5
I was coming back from a family wedding on Monday, so I had a BB facilitated class. Here is what it entailed:
We won’t be meeting in person on Monday, October 11. Instead, we will have a “on-line class.” There are two parts to the class, which is focused on informational literacy. Here are the three tasks you have for Monday:
1. Take the OLLIE Tutorial and Test. Sign onto Blackboard and select the OLLIE Text button. Follow the prompts.
2. Find either a review of or journal article about John Edgar Wideman’s Brothers and Keepers, the book “Our Time” is excerpted from. Read this review or article.
3. Write a summary of the review or article and post it on the Discussion Board on our Blackboard site. As part of your summary you should include a full bibliographic citation using MLA. The summary itself should be “meaty” enough to give people who haven’t read the review/article a good sense of what it says. Finally, write a brief analysis explaining whether you agree with the writer’s take on Wideman and why or why not. Do you think your colleagues should read the piece you read? Why or why not?
We won’t be meeting in person on Monday, October 11. Instead, we will have a “on-line class.” There are two parts to the class, which is focused on informational literacy. Here are the three tasks you have for Monday:
1. Take the OLLIE Tutorial and Test. Sign onto Blackboard and select the OLLIE Text button. Follow the prompts.
2. Find either a review of or journal article about John Edgar Wideman’s Brothers and Keepers, the book “Our Time” is excerpted from. Read this review or article.
3. Write a summary of the review or article and post it on the Discussion Board on our Blackboard site. As part of your summary you should include a full bibliographic citation using MLA. The summary itself should be “meaty” enough to give people who haven’t read the review/article a good sense of what it says. Finally, write a brief analysis explaining whether you agree with the writer’s take on Wideman and why or why not. Do you think your colleagues should read the piece you read? Why or why not?
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Day 4: Best Day So Far (or is it the espresso talking?)
Man, am I flying when I drink 5 shots of espresso before class -- this may be a problem since I was actually cheering in class and jingling my foot. I will try less shots next week!
I love working with the TAs because I do such a better job in my classes when I am learning from the TA's ideas. DeeDee talked about dealing with the n-word in her class and I realized that I needed to do that too. So, to start class today I said that as the students knew there was a racial slur in the text. I asked, "How should we handle this slur when we are working with the text?" The students seem startled that I brought this up but talked about dealing with it directly because it was there (if you are reading it aloud and it is there, say it unless it makes you uncomfortable). I asked if this couldn't possibly be painful for some students, to hear. The students seemed to want to reach consensus that we were in an educational space and we weren't referring to it out of malice and that if someone felt uncomfortable they could say so. I asked if they really thought that someone who was uncomfortable would actually admit it and they thought not. I have several students who identified themselves as African-American and who talked about how they saw any use of the word we had in our work as legitimate. I said that I wouldn't use it becuase no one needed to hear it from yet another white person in power. I asked them what they thought of that. They said essentially, do what you are comfortable with. I asked them if they thought using it or not using it unduly gave the word more power, but our discussion kind of petered out after that. Next time I might have us write about this last question and focus the conversation there.
Okay, next we did our qw. The entire class today was aimed at preparing students to work on their essays this weekend. I wanted to build on the work we had done focusing on W as a writer to connect the way the text is written to Wideman's project.
Here's the qw:
QW (15 m): In their introduction, B and P talk about how every reader has a personal take on what they read. There are multiple ways a reader of "Our Time" might interpret this text, might say this is Wideman's project, this is the most significant part of this essay. In this qw, identify a major theme, idea, or problem you see in this essay. If someone who hadn't read this essay asked you what "Our Time" was about what would you say and why?
While they were writing today I noticed that most students were working with texts that had marked. Hurray! After they wrote, I asked them what they wrote about and put their ideas on the board. Here were the topics they generated:
Family
Causation/Downward spiral
Ego
How to tell a story
Many students added several dimensions to each broad category, so we had rich subtopics (family structure, mothers, etc). I added in place/community.
Next I told the students they would work in groups on the topic they were most interested in. I went through each and had students raise their hands if they wanted to work on that topic. When there were more than 5 people, I created two groups on the topic. The smallest group had three people. They moved to join their groups and I gave them the following prompts for their groupwork:
1. Describe how this theme, idea, or problem is developed in the essay. Have specific places in the text to point to.
2. Why is this theme, idea, or problem important, according to Wideman. Please have a quote to back this up.
3. How do Wideman's moves as a writer (for instance the elements we discussed in the previous class) relate to this theme, idea, or problem?
I gave the students 25 minutes after which they reported back to all of us. It was really successful. Finally, I handed out the essay assignment and we talked about it briefly. I pointed out the work we had done all week prepared them for it.
I love working with the TAs because I do such a better job in my classes when I am learning from the TA's ideas. DeeDee talked about dealing with the n-word in her class and I realized that I needed to do that too. So, to start class today I said that as the students knew there was a racial slur in the text. I asked, "How should we handle this slur when we are working with the text?" The students seem startled that I brought this up but talked about dealing with it directly because it was there (if you are reading it aloud and it is there, say it unless it makes you uncomfortable). I asked if this couldn't possibly be painful for some students, to hear. The students seemed to want to reach consensus that we were in an educational space and we weren't referring to it out of malice and that if someone felt uncomfortable they could say so. I asked if they really thought that someone who was uncomfortable would actually admit it and they thought not. I have several students who identified themselves as African-American and who talked about how they saw any use of the word we had in our work as legitimate. I said that I wouldn't use it becuase no one needed to hear it from yet another white person in power. I asked them what they thought of that. They said essentially, do what you are comfortable with. I asked them if they thought using it or not using it unduly gave the word more power, but our discussion kind of petered out after that. Next time I might have us write about this last question and focus the conversation there.
Okay, next we did our qw. The entire class today was aimed at preparing students to work on their essays this weekend. I wanted to build on the work we had done focusing on W as a writer to connect the way the text is written to Wideman's project.
Here's the qw:
QW (15 m): In their introduction, B and P talk about how every reader has a personal take on what they read. There are multiple ways a reader of "Our Time" might interpret this text, might say this is Wideman's project, this is the most significant part of this essay. In this qw, identify a major theme, idea, or problem you see in this essay. If someone who hadn't read this essay asked you what "Our Time" was about what would you say and why?
While they were writing today I noticed that most students were working with texts that had marked. Hurray! After they wrote, I asked them what they wrote about and put their ideas on the board. Here were the topics they generated:
Family
Causation/Downward spiral
Ego
How to tell a story
Many students added several dimensions to each broad category, so we had rich subtopics (family structure, mothers, etc). I added in place/community.
Next I told the students they would work in groups on the topic they were most interested in. I went through each and had students raise their hands if they wanted to work on that topic. When there were more than 5 people, I created two groups on the topic. The smallest group had three people. They moved to join their groups and I gave them the following prompts for their groupwork:
1. Describe how this theme, idea, or problem is developed in the essay. Have specific places in the text to point to.
2. Why is this theme, idea, or problem important, according to Wideman. Please have a quote to back this up.
3. How do Wideman's moves as a writer (for instance the elements we discussed in the previous class) relate to this theme, idea, or problem?
I gave the students 25 minutes after which they reported back to all of us. It was really successful. Finally, I handed out the essay assignment and we talked about it briefly. I pointed out the work we had done all week prepared them for it.
Day 3: First day with Wideman
Started a bit sternly this day: I noticed one student who didn't have the reading in any form and announced to the class that they had to keep up with the reading for this class. That not keeping up had real consequences, not arbitrarily but because if they hadn't done the reading they were already falling behind and we had our first essay due in one week. I said that they shouldn't assume they would be able to get by this class through bs-ing their way through the writing about the texts -- that it wouldn't work for this class even if it had worked in previous English classes. In retrospect, I realize I came on a bit strong, but I am not convinced it wasn't useful to take this serious tone at this point: still early enough to build good practices in the class and to let them know I am noticing the level of their engagement.
I segued by saying, "On that cheery note, let's turn to the quickwrite." I built the qw to reinforce the work we had done at the end of the previous class talking about marking in the text. Here's the qw prompt:
QW (15 min): Take a minute to review the marks you made on the pages we have read for today. What moments struck you as interesting, puzzling, or important? Pick 2 and write about what it was about these moments that interested or puzzled you. What caught your attention here? Or, what was difficult about this moment?
After the 15 minutes I asked them what they wrote about and they pointed to all of the things I wanted to talk about today -- the moves Wideman makes as a writer concerning voice, description, metaphor, multiple perspectives. It was a really great discussion. 3/4 of the students participated in one way or another -- offering ideas or reading aloud from the text. I was really impressed that they introduced the topic about metaphors.
In our discussion we first read the italicized prefatory remarks and talked about whose voice it was and why Wideman who start this essay in this way. The students discussed how the way the piece began humanized Robby, forcing the reader to see him as a person first before seeing him as a criminal -- much like how a brother or mother would look at him. We also spent some time with the paragraph that tells the story about John French and the scared man and talked about how the voice changes to be a community telling its stories kind of voice.
Towards the end of class I said we would be working in developing a vocabulary for talking about writing together through the class. I asked them what language we had to discuss writing so far. The students offered "voice," "tone," "perspective." We came up with shared definitions for these terms and discussed how they often manifest in academic writing.
It was a good class, but in typical teacher way I was worried afterward that we had spent so much time on the writerly moves and not on broader interpretations of Wideman's project -- had to remind myself that this was perfectly good and that you can't do everything at once!
I segued by saying, "On that cheery note, let's turn to the quickwrite." I built the qw to reinforce the work we had done at the end of the previous class talking about marking in the text. Here's the qw prompt:
QW (15 min): Take a minute to review the marks you made on the pages we have read for today. What moments struck you as interesting, puzzling, or important? Pick 2 and write about what it was about these moments that interested or puzzled you. What caught your attention here? Or, what was difficult about this moment?
After the 15 minutes I asked them what they wrote about and they pointed to all of the things I wanted to talk about today -- the moves Wideman makes as a writer concerning voice, description, metaphor, multiple perspectives. It was a really great discussion. 3/4 of the students participated in one way or another -- offering ideas or reading aloud from the text. I was really impressed that they introduced the topic about metaphors.
In our discussion we first read the italicized prefatory remarks and talked about whose voice it was and why Wideman who start this essay in this way. The students discussed how the way the piece began humanized Robby, forcing the reader to see him as a person first before seeing him as a criminal -- much like how a brother or mother would look at him. We also spent some time with the paragraph that tells the story about John French and the scared man and talked about how the voice changes to be a community telling its stories kind of voice.
Towards the end of class I said we would be working in developing a vocabulary for talking about writing together through the class. I asked them what language we had to discuss writing so far. The students offered "voice," "tone," "perspective." We came up with shared definitions for these terms and discussed how they often manifest in academic writing.
It was a good class, but in typical teacher way I was worried afterward that we had spent so much time on the writerly moves and not on broader interpretations of Wideman's project -- had to remind myself that this was perfectly good and that you can't do everything at once!
Friday, October 1, 2010
Day 2: Espresso
Day 2 went by in a blur -- I was really really jazzed up by a venti iced americano.
I love teaching 107 the same quarter I teach the graduate course on comp pedagogy -- it reminds me of best practices and what I value. Having 660 right before 107 might be a very good thing.
Okay, what we did on Wednesday:
Last year's TAs had success with using Adler on marking the text so I wanted to try it out myself this year. I had originally imagined introducing Adler and my plagiarism handout during the first day (this is all important to begin with . . .), but I took a breath and realized that overloading the students' circuits on the 1st day wouldn't actually help, so I decided to move Adler to the 2nd day and the plagiarism stuff to next week. I had the idea of opening with Adler and then having us all practice on the first page of the B and P Intro they had read for today, but I decided that it was more important to start with the qw about the Intro. I decided this because I wanted the students to experience what this class will be like: you are expected to read and have a response to the readings; your contributions are valued, etc.
So, I started the class with a qw: What surprised, interested, or puzzled you in the Introduction? How do Bartholomae and Petrosky characterize reading and writing? Find a place in the text you would take us to start a discussion.
Then, we got in a circle and discussed their responses. The students said they were really surprised both by what B and P said about reading and writing and by how the Intro itself was written (how cool that they noted that!). One student talked about how different it was than intro to textbooks; he called it "unconventional." I used their comments about how reading and writing are discussed in the Intro to say that difficulty and failure are okay and part of learning and that the class (especially with the built in revision process) makes it possible to "fail" and still end the class with a good grade.
I segued from B and P on active reading and marking to Adler. I asked student volunteers to read parts of Adler aloud (I projected it) and then I asked them what kind of marks they already used and why. I kind of got ahead of myself -- damn espresso -- my lesson plan had been to start with their knowledge and then reinforce it with Adler. Here's how I had it written in my plan: · Active Reading
o How many mark your books? What kind of marks?
o Why is marking important?
o Adler
Oh well.
Finally, I had them do a in-class essay in response to this prompt: o Reflect on and describe your history with reading and writing. What experiences, good or bad, stand out for you? Why? What have you recognized about yourself as a writer? What would you like to work on in your writing?
Before they wrote I explained I would read but not grade the essay and that I used it to get a sense of where they are currently as writers. I also told them they would have the opportunity to read and reflect on this piece at the end of the course.
Thanks to the conversation we had at our TA meeting, I decided to ask the students to try to write without stopping for 30 minutes. I explained this was a way to work on your "writing muscle." I said that if you run out of things to say, draw and line and write about anything, including being blocked. I was pretty excited to see a couple of students actually did this and were able to say more things about their literacy histories! Hurrah!
I love teaching 107 the same quarter I teach the graduate course on comp pedagogy -- it reminds me of best practices and what I value. Having 660 right before 107 might be a very good thing.
Okay, what we did on Wednesday:
Last year's TAs had success with using Adler on marking the text so I wanted to try it out myself this year. I had originally imagined introducing Adler and my plagiarism handout during the first day (this is all important to begin with . . .), but I took a breath and realized that overloading the students' circuits on the 1st day wouldn't actually help, so I decided to move Adler to the 2nd day and the plagiarism stuff to next week. I had the idea of opening with Adler and then having us all practice on the first page of the B and P Intro they had read for today, but I decided that it was more important to start with the qw about the Intro. I decided this because I wanted the students to experience what this class will be like: you are expected to read and have a response to the readings; your contributions are valued, etc.
So, I started the class with a qw: What surprised, interested, or puzzled you in the Introduction? How do Bartholomae and Petrosky characterize reading and writing? Find a place in the text you would take us to start a discussion.
Then, we got in a circle and discussed their responses. The students said they were really surprised both by what B and P said about reading and writing and by how the Intro itself was written (how cool that they noted that!). One student talked about how different it was than intro to textbooks; he called it "unconventional." I used their comments about how reading and writing are discussed in the Intro to say that difficulty and failure are okay and part of learning and that the class (especially with the built in revision process) makes it possible to "fail" and still end the class with a good grade.
I segued from B and P on active reading and marking to Adler. I asked student volunteers to read parts of Adler aloud (I projected it) and then I asked them what kind of marks they already used and why. I kind of got ahead of myself -- damn espresso -- my lesson plan had been to start with their knowledge and then reinforce it with Adler. Here's how I had it written in my plan: · Active Reading
o How many mark your books? What kind of marks?
o Why is marking important?
o Adler
Oh well.
Finally, I had them do a in-class essay in response to this prompt: o Reflect on and describe your history with reading and writing. What experiences, good or bad, stand out for you? Why? What have you recognized about yourself as a writer? What would you like to work on in your writing?
Before they wrote I explained I would read but not grade the essay and that I used it to get a sense of where they are currently as writers. I also told them they would have the opportunity to read and reflect on this piece at the end of the course.
Thanks to the conversation we had at our TA meeting, I decided to ask the students to try to write without stopping for 30 minutes. I explained this was a way to work on your "writing muscle." I said that if you run out of things to say, draw and line and write about anything, including being blocked. I was pretty excited to see a couple of students actually did this and were able to say more things about their literacy histories! Hurrah!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)