About Critical Mass [dot] Writing [dot] Reviews [dot] Contact
« previous entry | return home | next entry »

June 9, 2009 [feather]
What she said

Rachel Toor says what needs to be said about the teaching of writing:


If graduate students in the humanities are not being taught how to write--how to structure an argument, how to make clear what is at stake, how to build tension on the sentence level--how can we expect those in the sciences to do any better? In every field there is an overabundance of content to master. Where do you steal the time in the curriculum to work on the form? The assumption is that whoever has gone before you in the teaching has already covered the basics. Graduate professors think that their students got it in their undergraduate years; composition instructors believe that they don't need to teach grammar because their students learned it in high school. How many students, do you think, are learning that an understanding of grammar, syntax, and usage is integral to clear expression of thoughts? That knowing how to write well is the most important skill you can develop, regardless of your career path?

Most students don't think about argumentation after they get their required freshman comp course out of the way. They take this important course when they are overwhelmed by the newness of college and are least ready to learn about the complexities of rhetorical strategies. Composition 101 is probably the hardest class to teach; unfortunately, it is usually led by brand-new graduate teaching assistants. It's no wonder most people don't know how to make an argument.


I like Toor's columns. She's a former editor who now teaches college-level creative writing, and she has marvelous fanatical scourge-like tendencies when it comes to talking about how important writing is and how the world is going to a hell in a handbasket because no one can write, and no one cares about that because no one can tell that no one can write because no one can write. She channels my own inner fanatical writing scourge when she does that. And her thoughts on the illogical infinite regression model of teaching writing--it's never your job because it was the job of other people before you, even when you can see very well for yourself that the people before you did not do their jobs--are thoughts I've had many times myself.

A secret I learned during my year teaching high school students at a small Massachusetts boarding school: They like grammar (and vocabulary and syntax and usage) lessons, and want them, and want to write better. A secret I learned when I returned to Penn from that job: Same is true of college students. I had always done massive grammar and syntax commenting on student papers along with more global commenting on structure and framing and even more global commenting on the content of the argument itself, but after that year in high school I started devoting some formal class time to it as part of the writing component of the lit courses I taught. That was an unusual thing to do in a literature course, and I worried at first that the students would find the whole thing beneath them (even though they needed the work). But they didn't. And they improved. And it was good.

UPDATE: Who knew she had a blog? It's here. She likes being known as having "scourge-like tendencies".

posted on June 9, 2009 7:17 AM




Trackback Pings:

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.erinoconnor.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1655






Comments:

I think maybe students would appreciate the study of grammar more if they were exposed to foreign languages at an early age. Just like it's hard for a fish to understand the existence of water, it's hard for a person to understand the rules of his own language until he discovers that they are not universal.

Posted by: david foster at June 9, 2009 8:01 AM





Post a comment:




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)