11/5/07

Responding to Student Writing: Workshop – RM 117

Nancy Sommers, Harvard University


Nick's notes on Nancy's introduction to her session


We do so much work responding to student writing, but we often don't know how they use that feedback and thus Nancy's research in trying to find out how students respond to response.

Interest resparked by two recent experiences: Daughter Rachel find an interest in returning and staying at school based on the comments she received on her writing at Vermont Community College: teacher responses to writing inspired Rachel to believe in herself as a writer who could do well in college.

Between the Drafts study of 400 Harvard students were asked best experience/worst experience. Best was getting feedback and worst was getting no feedback, except maybe a grade.

So Nancy saw power of feedback to both draw students in, and also, if not done (or not done well), to repulse students.

Questions for room: What were some of the most useful comments we received and what were least helpful when we were students.

NC: For me, the first thing that came to mind was a comment on a paper I wrote for Shakespeare class for Richard Logan at U. Hartford. Comments on the paper throughout with needs for changes. But bottom of the paper was a simple sentence: Your writing cheers me.

Nancy talked to Steven Pinker and he says to engage learning, on feedback, you have to start with the positive.

Other attendees are recalling comments from their own undergraduate days, even down to the class, professor, and assignment.

Nancy points out that these memories really do speak to the power and importance of comments.

But, she points out, that her research shows that comments cannot be just praise, or students won't grow as writers. But once they know you're taking them seriously as writers and are engaged with them, which praise can help establish, then you can offer good constructive comments that helps students move forward.

Nancy also points out some of her own commenting practices which students told her not helpful: They said she asked too many questions, for example, which she was doing to help them generate ideas. But they found the questions sometimes conflicting or overwhelming.

They also found "commands" hard to work with. Such as "be specific" or "develop this." Those comments didn't explain why what they had wasn't specific or developed nor do they tell students a way to be more specific or to develop.

After asking us to analyze an assignment and essay that came from it, Nancy notes, one of the things we see when we get a stack of papers is the consequences of pedagogy. We see what we may not have done well in designing and presenting the assignment. We learn to be better teachers because of this.

First Year Composition as Intro to Writing Studies – RM 117

Doug Downs, Utah Valley State College
This presentation describes who he has enacted the pedagogy at Utah Valley State College that he and Elizabeth Wardle (of the University of Dayton) wrote about here:

Downs, Douglas, and Elizabeth Wardle. "Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions: (Re)Envisioning 'First-Year Composition' as 'Introduction to Writing Studies.'" CCC 58.4 (2007): 552-584. http://inventio.us/ccc/archives/2007/06/douglas_downs_a.html




Nick's Notes on Doug's Session


Here are articles from the composition field that are eminently readable for any FY writing student:

Doug uses:
Sommers, Nancy. "Responding to Student Writing,"College Composition and Communication, Vol. 33, No. 2. (May, 1982), pp. 148-156. Link to full-text from JSTOR: http://tinyurl.com/34kt5s

What I've used:
Eldred, Janet Carey. "The Technology of Voice." CCC 48.3 (1997): 334-347. For an abstract and link to JSTOR copy, http://inventio.us/ccc/archives/1997/10/20_janet_carey.html

Britton, James. "Language and Experience," Language and Learning: The Importance of Speech in Children's Development. Boynton/Cook, 1993. Amazon reader has most of this chapter online in its "Look Inside the Book Feature". Go to the URL below and then click the "Excerpt" link:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0867093358/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-5658752-0097718#reader-link

For other articles you might use, consult these resources:

The Bedford Bibliography for Teachers of Writing Online by Nedra Reynolds, Bruce Herzberg, and Patricia Bizzell at http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/bb/

The Bedford Bibliography for Teachers of Basic Writing Online by Linda Adler-Kassner and Greg R. Glau for The Conference on Basic Writing at http://www.bedfordstmartins.com/basicbib/content.asp

CompPile by Richard Haswell and Glenn Blalock is an online bibliographic database for composition at http://comppile.tamucc.edu/

CompFAQs is a CompPile project which builds bibliographies around specific issues in the field. You can find a link on the page above, but it's really worth bookmarking on its own at http://comppile.tamucc.edu/wiki/CompFAQs/Home

11/4/07

Workshop A: Broke: When Technology (and Budgets) Fail – RM 117

Barclay Barrios, Florida Atlantic University

When it comes to technology in writing programs and writing classrooms, what can you do about being broke? In this session we will explore answers to this question in two dimensions. First, we will look at ways to fund technology in our programs despite perpetually tight budgets that leave us all broke. Then, we will look at strategies for overcoming teacher resistance to technology that itself is all too often "broke"--projectors that won't work, software that crashes, computers that won't boot. Many teachers encounter these failures when trying computers in their classrooms for the first time and take those failures to be the defining nature of technologies, abandoning this dimension of teaching because it doesn't work or it's too much trouble. Turning what's "broke" into pedagogically enabling moments provides teachers--even the most tech-savvy ones--with additional tools for coping with and using technology in the classroom.

Workshop B: Sustaining Writing Across the Curriculum: Programs, Politics, and Strategies - RM 115

Jeff Galin, Florida Atlantic University


We will discuss how differently configured WAC programs across a range of university settings can be conceived and sustained. Based on a sustainability model I have derived from the Balanton Group, this presentation will discuss what questions must be asked to develop a sustainability map for writing programs, particularly WAC programs. Drawing from the three programs that I have already studies, I will introduce the question sets that must be asked to map various WAC program configurations. WAC programs (and other similar institutions) should be able to use the results of my research to map their programs for sustainability indicators and assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of their programs. The results might also be used to identify and/or predict the need for programmatic change.

Workshop C: Theme, Tool, Text: The Visual in the College Writing Class – RM 120

Karla Kitalong, University of Central Florida


The idea would be that one can completely transform the class with a visual theme, where all the work revolves around visual communication, or one can be more tentative/deliberate and work in a few assignments. These assignments can be as conservative or as edgy as the teacher feels comfortable. It doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing enterprise, and you don't need to be an expert.


Some of the tools would be connotation/denotation, ethos/pathos/logos, information hierarchy (what's important/less so), and other familiar concepts that can easily be applied given a basic rhetorical background.

Workshop D: Beyond the English Department: Arts and Sciences TAs Teach Writing – RM 117

Kimberly Harrison, Florida International University
Mike Creeden, Florida International University

This presentation reports on a pilot program at Florida International University in which Arts and Sciences teaching assistants outside the English department teach composition and receive hands-on training through our hybrid first-year courses. We will outline our motivations and goals for the program, provide details on our TA training plan, and discuss initial assessments of both the hybrid courses and the TA program.


Nick's Notes on Kimberly's and Mike's session

Institutional context:
88 percent of writing courses taught by adjuncts who have MA's in literature with little training in composition or writing studies. Professional development of adjuncts is hard because adjuncts are busy.

Fall 2006, 4,500 students in FYC.
-- 18 sections taught by Full-Time Faculty
-- 158 sections taught by Adjunct Faculty
-- 9 sections taught by TAs (MA and MFA)

Limited classroom space.

Thus having to train TAs from other disciplines (Arts and Sciences TAs). Proposed to increase TA ships as an initiative w/ Dean of A&S who passed proposal to Provost. Unfortunately Provost indicated funds were tight, but money was found just before start of fall and they were able to start the program.

TAs from other departments:

History -- 2
International Relations -- 2
Religious Studies -- 2
Sociology --1
Political Science -- 2

(English also got 2 more.)
  1. Hope to have increased number of teachers in writing program
  2. Improved mentoring and pedagogical preparation of graduate students (which recent grads said they need).
  3. Increase ability to offer field-specific writing and rhetoric courses as program grows
  4. Spread responsibility for writing beyond the English department (aka toe-hold for WAC).
TA's commit to two semesters in writing program, hopefully they'll do 4, but when done they go back to their departments trained to teach writing.

Goals:
  • complicate distinction between "content" instructor and writing instructor
  • increase audiences w/in and w/out the writing program -- program is known better
  • increase visibility of and within the writing program
  • open our pedagogy: as we work w/ other depts, we also communicate more fully about our goals
TA courses are capped at 40. TAs can't be instructor of record, so they focus on feedback. TAs learning how to respond to writing more fully.

FIU use of A&S TAs looked at other programs:
Rutgers -- Allows all PhD candidates across disc. to teach fyc
Cornell -- teaching fellows
Duke

TA training two pronged:
4 hours of graduate credit in Teaching College Composition -- at same time for assistantship work in hybrid class w/ seasoned instructor

Practicum based on hybrid version of ENC 1101 -- attend to f2f classes per week, review online student writing, conference and grade essays.

Hybrids are by definition writing-intensive:
"Because of the highly text-based nature of websites and email, hybrid courses become de facto writing-intensive courses when teachers work carefully to integrate the online and classroom components," Pete Sands

Hybrid project started last year in response to limited space. Looked at
UWM
Maricopa
ASU
and other places.
  • 10 sections
  • 40 students, with one or two TAs. 1 - 3 instructors per course.
  • 2/1 breakdown: 2 days f2f to 1 day online; better than 50/50 for FIU.
  • Consistent curriculum -- Each hybrid shell contains syllabus, unit plans (w/ grading criteria) for all major essays. Instructors can modify as desired.
  • Assessment -- Shells also contain three student surveys -- start, middle, end.
Conference every essay -- usually first draft is conferenced. But person who conferences doesn't grade the same essay they conference.

Graded more leniently papers they conferenced.

Curriculum developed w/ instructors who were leading they hybrid; focused on making online/offline activities sync and complement. Collection of units/assignments that start with but instructors can change.

Using BB w/ online component.

Structure immerses TAs in writing process and not focus on grammar.

Two TAs, Shelley Wick, International Relations PhD and Carolina Zumaglini, History are describing their experiences.

Both were initially resistant, but after getting into the program and the training, they're discovering that it is helping them as teachers, scholars and writers. Details are wonderful, but I'm listening intently and can't quite keep up running notes as fully as I'd like.

Workshop E: Supporting ESL Writers - RM 115

Christine Tardy, DePaul University

College writing classrooms have grown more and more linguistically diverse over the years, so that nearly all writing instructors are also ESL writing instructors. Participants in this session will discuss pedagogical techniques that support ESL student learning within "mainstream" composition classrooms and will practice strategies for giving appropriate feedback to second language writers' texts. Additional materials will be provided. You can also get a digital copy of the handout here: http://condor.depaul.edu/~ctardy/Handout.doc

Workshop F: Literacy Across Disciplines In and Out of the Academy: Engaging and Empowering Student Writers – RM 120

Suellyn Winkle, Sante Fe Community College
Anne Kress, Sante Fe Community College

The majority of community college and university freshman have the same goal: to complete a bachelor’s degree and enter the working world. While it is true that not all students have excelled academically prior to their college enrollment, all bring significant and meaningful life and work experience that can be leveraged to create an engaging academic classroom environment. The press to develop writing and thinking acumen in students across all disciplines and at all levels is especially strong in an age of new media and technology-enabled discourse, which promotes greater access to the tools of 21st Century literacy while at the same moment it limits access to the traditional filters for bias and quality. This session will demonstrate—with large doses of humor and reality—how to empower student writers within the academy to set a pattern for engagement along the lifelong writing spectrum: first, as composition students; second, as upper division majors; and third, as literate citizens in the larger world outside the walls of academe. The presenters will share examples of podcasts, blogs, wikis, and hyperlinked texts as objects of class analysis and products of class assignments.

Workshop G: Creating a W.O.V.E.N. Curriculum: Composing Means More than Writing – RM 117

Rebecca Burnett, Georgia Institute of Technology

As a discipline, we’ve moved beyond first-year writing courses that focus on five-paragraph essays to encourage not only personal narratives but also argument and critique. And we’ve moved beyond upper-level business, professional, and technical communication courses that focus on formulaic memos, proposals, and reports to courses that focus on rhetorical contingencies and documents for actual clients shaped by unique situations. But our students and work live in worlds surrounded by more than printed artifacts and formal presentations. This workshop session encourages a WOVEN approach. What’s WOVEN? Written, oral, visual, electronic, and nonverbal communication.

A WOVEN approach to both first-year and upper-level courses can be implemented in a single classroom or in a campus-wide communication-across-the-curriculum program. This multi-modal approach is rhetorical, explaining the integration of composing, interpreting, and using written, oral, visual, and nonverbal communication. During the workshop, participants will be able to address both classroom and programmatic concerns:

Classroom concerns

  • Developing activities and assignments that have a WOVEN focus
  • Adapting and creating pedagogies that engage students in WOVEN activities
  • Balancing teaching in classrooms and computer labs
  • Extending assignment and course assessment/evaluation to include all WOVEN activities and assignments
Programmatic concerns
  • Implementing institutional and perhaps system-wide changes in course goals, objectives, and outcomes for writing and communication courses
  • Coordinating with others on campus who require writing and communication courses
  • Designing initial and on-going professional development support for TAs and faculty
  • Extending programmatic assessment/evaluation to include a WOVEN perspective
In this workshop session, participants will also learn about the innovative communication- across-the-curriculum WOVE initiatives at Iowa State University (in place since 1999), see highlights of the new WOVEN initiative at Georgia Tech, and learn about ways to create a WOVEN class or curriculum at their own institution.

Rebecca's Presentation at an Assessment Symposium on the limits --to say nothing of the illogic-- of rubrics:

http://casymposium.blogspot.com/2007/10/100-145-restrict-rubrics-to-regain.html

Workshop H: Evolving Technologies in Writing Assessments - RM 120

Michael Neal, Florida State University

In this workshop we will look at a number of technologies that intersect with writing assessment such as ePortfolio software, course management tools, response/comment features, holistic scoring, multi-media composing software, and machine scored student writing. Specifically, we will examine common promises, practices, and socio-educational implications for students, programs, and the teaching of writing.

Workshop I: Plagiarism and Computers: Fun Ways to Take Control of the Issue -- RM 115

Nick Carbone, B/SM and University of Maryland University College

In this session, we look at plagiarism from the inside out: if it's an issue exacerbated by computer technology and the ease of copying and pasting, of surfing and downloading, how can we apply a little pedagogical judo and turn things our way? What are some strategies and moves we can make to flip the issue from something to be worried about to something we can embrace for its teaching opportunities? And heck, sure it's a serious issue, but why not make learning about it intellectually fun?



links we'll be using.


A plagiarism tip from Barclay Barrios:
http://bedfordbits.com/index.php?/site/articles/the_wages_of_plagiarism/

You can take this tip and do a lot with case studies of people whom, if not brought low by plagiarism, suffered a reputation hit: Doris Kearns Goodwin, most famously. But also, there are probably cases too of people wrongly accused of plagiarism. What's the flip side of the issue? How should students prepare and what should they do to show they did not plagiarize? What safe guards can they take and what good writing habits should they learn and follow?

http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail64.html The site's a hoot, and it's funny. And it's also a useful teaching tool, worth showing in class if you can do it, or sending students to look at and write about it for a class discussion on doing one's own work.

What is good about this piece? What does it make fun of? How can you use it jump-start a discussion with your students?

http://slate.msn.com/id/2059540/ leads to "Adventures in Cheating," by Seth Stevenson, a piece that samples term paper mills, and finds --no surprise-- that you get what you pay for (and even that ain't much). I wrote a response to this piece, which again, I find useful for teaching, that began, "Essentially, the free papers stink, and they're recycled. That is, free paper mill sites often carry copies of the same papers."

After having students read Stevenson's essay, do what Kelly Ritter of Southern Ct. State U. had her students do: have them find and then analyze and review a term paper mill site. Have them sample and analyze the papers. What are the sites intellectual property and copyright policies? What do the the sites say about plagiarism and being for 'research'?


http://bedfordstmartins.com/plagiarism goes to the Bedford/St. Martin's Plagiarism workshop site. This is a faculty resource where you'll find useful handouts, teaching tips, and reviews of plagiarism detection tools.

http://bedfordstmartins.com/technotes/workshops/talkingplagy.htm
After reading Robert Harris's book, The Plagiarism Handbook: Strategies for Preventing, Detecting, and Dealing with Plagiarism (2001, from Pyrczak Publishing); an article on the role of honor codes by Robert Boynton in the Washington Post; and thinking about the many plagiarism discussions that have come up on professional listservs I participate on such as WPA, TechRhet, WCenter, it occurred to me that the first place to begin a better discussion with my students on plagiarism is in my own syllabus. talkingplagy.htm lays out what I use to start the conversation.

See --and add your own contributions to-- CompFAQ's collection of resources at http://comppile.tamucc.edu/wiki/Plagiarism/HomePage
CompFAQ lets composition instructors contribute their own ideas and resources to the composition community. It doesn't take long to add something.