Chadchat's Weblog

Annotated Bib

chadchat — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:03:29 +0000

I tried just uploading this to the media library, so if this is redundant, I apologize in advance! I haven’t been able to open anyone else’s, so this may not work either.

How do we learn from what we are teaching?

chadchat — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:48:43 +0000

When you stare out into the classroom, you often get a mix of feigned interest and total bewilderment. So how do you know what the students are actually gleaning from the lesson?

This coming semester, I’m planning on implementing a little bit of our expressive philosophy into the 1302 classroom with the addition of a before-and-after notebook. They’ll have an open-ended prompt at the beginning of class, something to get the juices flowing, and then at the end I’m going to have them respond more directly from the discussion of the day. Hopefully, this will work out so that I can assess what is actually getting through, what’s working, and what needs work on my end. I think that this direct conduit will help me evaluate myself as an instructor, as well as improving the methods that I’m bringing to the table.

What should we know?

chadchat — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:39:56 +0000

The prerequisite for teaching freshman composition is between 15 and 18 hours of graduate classroom experience—on the learning side. This flies under the assumption that after a year of “higher” higher learning we have the knowledge base to teach others to do what we do. What about the skill base? An instructor of First Year Composition needs more than just a cursory knowledge of the study of English. All this ensures is that we can teach how we write, not how you can write. Just like one professor said in the “take 20” DVD, I feel like I owe this first round of kids an apology, because they are the guinea pigs that I’m trying this whole “teaching thing” out on. I’m beginning to learn what students expectations are from a course, which helps me to tailor what I can expect from them in turn.

Students are not the tabula rasa; each has his or her individual knowledge base, and we can attempt to some extent to tap into that. Despite imposing reading quizzes and prompting class discussion, the majority of students will inevitably come into class as a collective blank slate as far as reading the material goes. That’s when we can turn the circle of knowledge inward, having them work collaboratively, learning from each other and the vast resource that another human consciousness provides.

Philosophy of Teaching

chadchat — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 15:21:04 +0000

If theory of teaching is the idealistic, then philosophy of teaching is the more concrete. It seems as though philosophy is formed through practical application of one’s own methods, and then taking a step back and evaluating. What worked? What seems like it might work? That’s the only way that I can imagine forming a useful philosophy that might go into a teaching statement. If I’ve learned anything this semester by being in the classroom, it’s that your identity forms over time as a reaction/interaction with the class. You may think that you’re going to go in there and be Mr. Dynamic, bubbling with charisma and just engaging students on a personal level, but it can all fade away once this “theory” is tested. You find yourself latching on to the students who actually want to learn and trying to give discipline to the ones who aren’t even sure why they are in class instead of bed.

Philosophy is formed in a trial-by-fire, and all the ideals will melt away to the essentials. Everyone will have an individual philosphy, because the question is this: What is the best way that I can encourage and evaluate writing? The answer will be different for everyone, and it will change between teaching different sections.

Still not sure

chadchat — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 03:06:03 +0000

I guess I haven’t really been able to successfully define my teaching style as of yet, and perhaps that is something that will only come with time. As someone who hasn’t fully shaped an identity in the world of academia, both in teaching and as a student, making these distinctions can seem a little daunting. It’s good that we’re getting the survey of everything that is out there as far as teaching theories and strategies, but this is restrictive and liberating at the same time.

For me, it’s kind of like going to the supermarket and trying to pick out a mango. I’m relatively new to the world of mangoes, so when I look at a bin full and try to select a “good one,” it can sometimes be a little overwhelming. That’s an overly simplistic analogy, but it gets the point across. I’ll just have to overcome my anxiety over produce and try a few until I can figure out which is the best–for me.

Important! (in theory)

chadchat — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 02:58:49 +0000

Maybe I was a bit jaded by my brief stint in Critical Methods here at Tech. I’ve just never been one to put a lot of stock in theory if there was no practical application. It seems that the only reason that we learn theory is to participate in a community that appreciates theory, and most people will agree that circular logic is not a very successful rhetorical strategy. This goes for the afore-mentioned Critical Methods course, which we are persuaded to believe is important because it is part of the required pedagogy courses, and for the theory that we learn in 5060. The main benefit that I can see to learning the theories of college composition is to be able to qualify our own style of teaching and to have the ability to speak the same language as the people who are employing teachers. That in itself is a practical application, and I can live with that answer until a better criterion comes along for evaluation.

How do I write?

chadchat — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:33:11 +0000

In thinking about this exercise, I envisioned myself writing a short story. After years of practicing a skill, we all tend to get into a particular rhythm. Here’s my list that we brainstormed in class with regard to this question:

Silence, no TV, no music
Energy drink or tea
Prewriting process is highly mental
Once the idea is there, can jot a rough outline
Refer to the magic book of phrases that I take constant notes in
Start with a specific style in mind
Constantly revising to ensure continuity
Write in long stretches, smoke when fizzling out and need to refuel
Best under pressure (that statistic may be skewed)
Read something good in the same style if blocked
Form a mental montage/movie and let the characters determine the action
Straight to the computer, no hand-writing

Like I said, theses habits are formed only through practice; there may be no shortcut to teaching them. Practice takes dedication, and dedication is something that stems from interest, or withers and dies with disinterest. The biggest challenge is engaging students on a level that they care about.

The issue of “voice”

chadchat — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:24:21 +0000

A friend of mine, Joe Justice in the creative writing department, once said that he felt his writing had gotten worse as a result of the PhD program. Not exactly a ringing endorsement, given, but I think that says something about the issue of voice in an academic environment vs. a “creative” context. When you get down to it, the creative writing MA and the literature MA at Tech only differ by the requirement of four workshops in CW. This means that the rest of our course work is based in academic writing outside of our specialization. If Joe felt that his writing had gotten worse, I can only think that this was a result of the competing types of writing that he was engaging in. Voice in the Peter Elbow sense seems to be a product of highly expressive writing, at least in finding that voice at first. Academic voice and expressive voice necessarily differ, and at times its difficult to decide which had to put on. This makes it even more difficult to teach writing to beginning writers, especially when that dilemma extends to writers well into doctoral programs.

Take 20

chadchat — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:29:19 +0000

One of the most impressive aspects of the Take 20 presentation was the caliber of teachers that were interviewed. Maybe it’s just that I’m not a big proponent of New Criticism and the text standing on its own apart from the writer, but it was satisfying to put the names from theoretical texts that we are reading with the faces. This somehow makes the task of mastering both their theories and the charges for teaching more manageable.

It was surprising how even the big wigs like Bartholomae continue to be oriented toward progress and current theories. They seem to set out in the teaching of composition, not just grabbing last year’s syllabus, but constantly reinventing the course. This constant evaluation of what is working and what is just bouncing off of students’ heads is daunting and inspiring at the same time. I don’t expect to jump out of the gates and be on par with the leading theoreticians of composition, but the dynamism that is available makes me think that we have a level playing field, and I’m just starting to acquire those skills.

Why teach composition?

chadchat — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 02:10:25 +0000

We have been discussing a lot of the reasons for freshman composition over the first few weeks of class. We are teaching the fundamental tools: organization, argumentation, and clear communication in writing (perhaps even in speaking). They are the essential means of making internal thought external, universals that transcend all disciplines, just as grammar builds toward successful rhetoric. On a practical level, the assignments that we use in 1301 are designed to give practical modules for developing a thorough argumentative paper.