Sunday, March 28, 2010

Reading Student Writing Rhetorically

Printer friendly version: http://www.calstatela.edu/academic/english/comp/ReadingRhetorically.pdf

Instructors in all disciplines recognize the importance of writing to learning. Three-fourths or more of instructors respond that students learn more in courses where writing is required, and nearly all say that good writing skills are important to success in their fields. Why then do nearly two-thirds of instructors report that they do not have time to assign or respond to writing? As any experienced instructor knows, this survey data is not contradictory. When most instructors report not having time to assign writing, they are probably referring to not having time to respond to student writing.

Careful reading of and commenting on student writing can be very time-consuming, but it doesn't have to be. Here are a few simple changes that can dramatically reduce the time required to comment on student writing:

  1. Instructors can incorporate more low-stakes writing in their courses, where students gain the benefits that come from increased writing without instructors suffering the burden of increased "grading."
  2. Instructors can create more effective writing assignments that help students identify the purpose, audience and genre of the assignment and therefore produce better work.
  3. Instructors can develop clear grading criteria that help students understand how their work will be evaluated, and help instructors evaluate that work.
  4. Instructors can read more "rhetorically" and less prescriptively.

Arguably the most controversial of the above suggestions is the last, and yet adopting it would probably have the greatest positive impact on instructor workload and student writing. For many instructors much of the time spent responding to student writing is really time spent editing someone else's text. While instructors should pay some attention to correctness and clarity, usually the student's greater need is rhetorical.

To read rhetorically is to read as the audience, to assume the position of reader for the writer and respond accordingly. The shift is subtle but powerful. The teacher is the authority and pronounces on correctness and incorrectness. The reader is not the authority (the writer is) and can only comment on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the presentation. When the instructor responds rhetorically, the discussion about student writing shifts from rules and prescriptions to purposes and choices.

Emphasizing the rhetoric of student writing focuses attention on the effects (intended and unintended) produced by the writing and the kinds of questions readers ask, which can be divided into the following categories:

Focus: What is the text about? Does the writer tell me early on or do I have to hunt around to find it? Do I always know what the focus of the text is or are there places where I'm unsure? Has the writer neglected to discuss other aspects implied by the main idea(s)?

Development: Is special and detailed knowledge required to understand what the writer is saying? Does the writer (incorrectly) assume readers possess this knowledge? Is the evidence or description adequate to the task? Am I persuaded by the evidence? Is the description detailed enough for the writer's purpose?

Organization: Is the organization of the material effective given the writer's purpose? Does the writer recognize and effectively employ the conventions of this genre?

The Triage Approach


The following procedure was developed for writing tutors by Dr. John Edlund, now at Cal Poly Pomona.

Skim the draft quickly to find the major problems or areas of possible improvement.

Respond to the draft by identifying problems at the global level, the sentence level, and the grammatical level.

Global/Rhetorical (the paper as a whole)

Considering the audience and format required by the assignment or the purpose for the writing:

  • Do the content, tone, organizational scheme, and other characteristics serve the writer’s intention?
  • What fairly simple changes would immediately improve the paper’s readability or effectiveness?

Syntax/Style (Readability or sentence-level negotiation of meaning)

  • Is the text “readable” (easy to process)? If not, what is the problem?
  • Are any sentences awkward, unclear, or incomprehensible?

Grammatical Systems

  • Are there consistent problems with particular grammatical forms?
  • Can “consciousness raising” facilitate acquisition of these forms?
  • What would you put on a “personal proofreading checklist” for this student?

Saturday, March 6, 2010

Research and Information Literacy

Printer friendly version: http://www.calstatela.edu/academic/english/comp/CC-InfoLit.pdf

The most recent Composition Conversation focused on information literacy, but the discussion quickly turned to teaching research skills and research writing in first-year writing courses. This shift was unsurprisingly given the close connection between research and information literacy. If research is the university’s attempt to institutionalize inquiry and each student’s attempt to discover his or her intellectual curiosity, then information literacy identifies the foundational skills necessary to feed that desire to know.

The conversation initially focused on the resources available to help ENGL 102 instructors incorporate information literacy in their courses. A range of instructional materials were developed by CSULA librarian Catherine Haras and have been available online at the composition faculty resources web site since September 2008. These materials include exercises that encourage students to explore the library’s resources and think about the different types of research materials available. Also included are sample assignments and guidelines for incorporating and assessing student research specifically in ENGL 102.

Several participants also mentioned class visits to the library to participate in research workshops. These workshops introduce information literacy skills and help students navigate the wealth of resources available. All participants commented on the success of these workshops, though some suggested they were underutilized and others reported the concerns expressed by the librarians that students could be better prepared. The librarians have suggested that instructors could do the following to make the most of the library visit: 1) Review the materials on information literacy posted on the Composition Faculty resources page; and 2) Help students develop a focus for their research assignment prior to the library visit and even have students send their topics to the librarian so that he or she can prepare specifically for the students’ research focus.

While the availability of these resources makes it possible to teach research in a first-year writing course, some participants noted that ENGL 102 is merely one piece of the puzzle. Just as first-year writing courses are not solely responsible for writing instruction at the university, ENGL 102 is not solely responsible for ensuring information literacy competency. Some even wondered whether research was appropriate in a first-year writing course, noting that the teaching of research in first-year writing is a controversial subject. The Writing Program Administrators (WPA) Outcomes statement for first-year composition did not initially include any outcomes related to research and only later added one under the category “Composing in Electronic Environments.” Some experts believe research is better taught in the disciplines, and of course students’ research experience at the university will hopefully include several self-initiated and self-directed research projects in their major courses. But as one participant observed, research skills like writing skills develop slowly over time and after much practice. While we can’t “inoculate” them with information literacy, we can expose them to the process. If we attempt to teach a “product,” we will almost always fail because the research project is a discipline-specific genre. If we attempt to teach a “process,” we can help students conduct independent research and join the academic research community.

Core Information Competencies: An Outline


The CSULA information literate student can:

  1. Define the research topic and the need for information
  2. Access information effectively and efficiently
  3. Evaluate information critically
  4. Organize, synthesize, and communicate information for a specific purpose
  5. Ethically and legally access and use information

(taken from “Core Information Competencies” developed by the John F. Kennedy Memorial Library, CSULA)

Information Literacy Instructional Materials


The following materials developed by the JFK Library are available on the Composition Faculty Resources web site (http://www.calstatela.edu/academic/english/cinfolit.php)

Library Exercises:

  • Information Diary
  • Narrowing a Topic
  • Managing What You Find: Research Journal
  • Scholarly Journal or Popular Magazine
  • Web Site Evaluation

ENGL 102 Materials

  • Constructing the ENGL 102 Research Assignment
  • Model Rubric for ENGL 102 Research Outcomes

Library Research Tutorial