2014 Seminar in Teaching Writing @ LaGuardia Community College

Monday, December 1, 2014

Link to Hayward book if you use for Case Study

"Insights Into Cultural Divides" is from THIS BOOK.

Closing Semester Stuff

1. We're working in the lab today: revise earlier projects or finish your Case Study.

2. On Wednesday everyone will speak for 2-4 minutes about their Case Study. Be prepared to state your thesis, and then tell give one relevant example from your tutoring that explains or shows it. If you want to add any thoughts about the course content (readings, discussion, etc), you can do so.

3. All final revisions are due this Wednesday.

4. The final exam is on Wednesday the 10th in our normal Wednesday class. The final grade conference is Monday the 15th in my office M 109-a. Please arrive at our normal class time, 10.30am, for our grade conference.

Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Case Study

My name is oop and I am a Humanities Major on a Childhood Education track

with an English concentration. I am currently in an English 220 class taught by Dr. Cooper. I

came to the course as a requirement for my interest but, I stayed in the course because I enjoy

tutoring, writing, and the class discussions. My pedagogy of education is student centered and

collaborative due to their ability to create agents of positive change which is much needed in

every era but particularly our day and age with words such as gentrification and ninety-nine

percent at home in our vocabulary. Although student centered and collaborative strategies may

seem as opposing concepts they are not. It has been my experience that students need an

exploration of the self to progress into an understanding of their fellow human beings so they

may eventually consider what can be done about the situations they find themselves in. I suppose

this is why I enjoyed James Moffett’s Active Voice (1981) so much. He allows for freedom of

expression to improve writing as shown through his student’s example “Funny Feelings” (192).

This book is chock full of ways to have students collaborate while The social activist in me has

always enjoyed Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1976) for his appreciation of the state

of the forgotten children his writing that the injustice is here, it is real, and it needs to change. In

that same vein Jonathon Kozol’s Savage Inequalities (1992) highlights the extreme state of

oppression that a disproportionate number of our children endure as a part of their daily reality.

Tutoring writing is liberating. It creates opportunity for people that do not have the means

to develop a skill as essential to expression as writing. Tutoring offers a chance not just to better

our pieces but to better our understanding of others and their experiences in the hope of

unraveling the conundrum of life’s challenges. It is through the sharing of our lives that bridges

and alliances are formed and tutoring writing behaves as a vehicle to this end. The empowering

significance of being able to express oneself clearly, with discipline and focus, allows us to

become agents of positive change within ourselves and our communities. Freire understood that

to deny proper education to children (meaning education rich in critical thinking and freedom) is

the worst form of oppression. He writes “The banking approach to education for example will

never propose to students that they critically consider reality” (Pedagogy of the Oppressed 74).

Once we comprehend disparities in our realities we are moved to change them. I mentioned

earlier that my philosophy is entwined both in student centered principles and collaboration. My

reasoning for the first is the value I place on an individual’s ideas. Those ideas are what make us

human and to stifle them is to “dehumanize” as Freire states (Pedagogy of the Oppressed 75).

The latter portion of my pedagogy, collaboration, is vital to connecting the agents of change so

they may find fulfillment in their pursuit of equality.

Collaboration can be a powerful propellant toward understanding another perspective.

During the tutoring session we had with Professor H’s English 99 students I had an opportunity

to tutor two students who had opposing views on gentrification. Student A was a lifelong

resident of a neighborhood undergoing the change from out group space to hipster central.

Student B felt that gentrification was only natural because it “reduces crime and brings in trendy

stores”. This may be very nerdy of me but I find this exciting! Here sat two people who would

otherwise not interact sharing conversation on their opposing views and isn’t that the beginning

of everything? A conversation leaves remnants of one an others opinions almost like an

intentional de ja vu experience where they are absorbing “eye contact” and “body language”

cue’s that drive meaning from mere words (Tutoring Writing). Just as the broken banking system

of education Freire mentions “deposits” facts deprived of critiques the combination of

collaboration and student centered writing deposits a counter opinion in another wise one sided

mind. My spliced philosophy honors the individual and the societal. Getting back to students A

and B, if you recall A is against while B is for gentrification. While A is discussing the years

spent in struggle to get the neighborhood in better shape she is emotional. It comes out in her

raised eyebrow and tone as she speaks of a “loss of culture” and “friendships” as people are

pushed out of affordable apartments. Student B is left with little defense and when she attempts

to defend it comes up weak with the “trendy store defense” because the crime portion was

already noted by student A to have been under control prior to gentrification. Although I don’t

expect every collaborative effort to end so smoothly it does make me warm and fuzzy when they

do.

If we agree that the purpose of writing is to better understand each other and life then we

Might be able to find some value in this two tiered approach to tutoring writing. The first tier

speaks to the self. The second tier speaks to community. Combining the two builds sparks of

understanding. What more can we ask for?

Case Study Peer Review Suggestions

ATTACH ALL COMMENTS YOU RECEIVE UNDER FINAL DRAFT: Papers without comments will lose 7 points off their final score; these 7 points can only be redeemed by visiting the Writing Center before the paper comes due):

What is the goal my response?

What is the goal my response?

The goal of your response is to offer the writer some positive praise and some suggestions for revision based on the assignment. It’s very important the piece addresses the assignment. If you're confused, you need to say why. If they need to expand their ideas, you need to tell which ones, and also how to do it. Their interest and focus should also make you interested. If you weren't interested, they need tell them what they could have done to make you more interested.

As for how you should organize your response, see the directions below. Here are the specific steps:

Comment Directions (from the text Tutoring Writing)

1. Open a general statement of assessment about the piece’s relationship to the assignment. Be clear about which parts fulfill the assignment and which parts need improvement.

2. Present comments so the writer knows which problems with text are most important and which are of lesser importance.

3. Use comments primarily to call attention to strengths and weaknesses in the piece, and be clear about the precise points where they occur.

4. Don't feel obligated to do all the 'fixing.' Refrain from focusing on grammar unless it impedes your ability to understand the piece.

5. Write comments that are text-specific, and uniquely aimed at the piece and the writer.

Strategies

1. Pose at least two questions that ask for clarification or that seek other possible views or more information on the subject.

2. Let the writer know what specific lines, ideas, and stylistic touches you find pleasing.

3. When you make a specific, concrete suggestion for improvement, try couching it in a qualifier: "You might try..." or "Why don't you add..." or "Another way of writing the lead might be..."

4. If you notice a pattern of errors (incorrect use of commas, etc) comment on it in a global way at the end of the piece.

Monday, November 17, 2014

Case Study: Interesting but in need of revision

My name is XVZ, and I am Writing and Literature major at LaGuardia Community College. As a student in Dr. Justin Rogers-Cooper’s Seminar in Teaching Writing class, I have been introduced to numerous writing techniques and teaching styles. As a private tutor, I felt I had enough knowledge to help students achieve academic greatness and while honor roll status and certificates were received, being in this class has taught me that education should be about more than just a grade. Contrary to popular belief, a number or a letter does not determine individual intelligence. My personal philosophy on pedagogy is all over the place. The best way I can answer this is to go all the way to the beginning of the semester, to the first day of class. When I walked in, everyone was busy writing about what in their opinion is the definition of “good teaching”. Zilelian and Ross were the names that immediately came to mind. Now, while I could go on about how they were amazing in their own way, I will say what they had in common: they were patient and believed in their students. They played a big role in what I believe good teaching is. Patience is definitely a key factor in good teaching; it may even surpass other contributing factors in significance. However, the idea of patience goes further than tolerating a great deal of stress and frustration from students. It also transitions into being tolerant with oneself and knowing that the obstacles are worth enduring because the outcome will be much greater. Being a patient educator means that you understand that not all students learn or grow at the same pace and that some need more encouragement than others.

Throughout the semester, I was able to observe tutoring sessions at the Writing Center and was privileged enough to work one-on-one with freshman students. What I learned was that all of the tutors, myself included, had one common goal and that was to help the student. Tutoring is more than just reinforcing what a teacher or professor has taught you, it’s about learning how to apply acquired knowledge to assignments and to your personal life. Tutoring should be more than helping students understand material; it’s about helping them in their entirety. This is a little idea that Moffett advocated: growth through thought development. His “…progression drama-narrative-generalization-argumentation describes not only long-range growth toward an enlarging repertory but describes also the daily abstracting we do as we convert new experience to working knowledge” (13). Each of these stages is necessary because students see the event taking place (drama), they memorize key components and share that with others (narrative), they analyze the situation (exposition), and take a stand and defend a side (argumentation). Tutors should encourage their students to think freely and to not be afraid to voice their opinions and thoughts. The idea of exercising free thought is so important because it helps develop different critical patterns in thought and it allows a person to interpret that information accordingly. Free thought allows a student to see different perspectives, something that is necessary for healthy growth, something that Moffett puts an emphasis on with the drama-narrative-generalization-argumentation model.

During my observations at the Writing Center, one technique that was constantly practiced was Collaborative Tutoring. Donald A. McAndrew and Thomas J. Reigstad describe this technique to be the most effective during most tutorials due to the flexibility of the tutor—“the tutor encourages the writer, often with open-ended and probe-and-prompt questions, to engage in off-the-paper, exploratory talk and to expand upon underdeveloped themes in the paper” (26). All of the sessions I observed dedicated a great deal of time to talking and with good reason too. Conversation and free talking are two strategies that were constantly being used during the Writing Center tutorials and during my own peer-to-peer sessions. Many people overlook the simplicity of talking when it comes to the academic world. This is horrible because it’s eliminating a basic form of communication in which a lot of important material and/or information can be released and used in assignments. It restricts students and denies them the fulfillment of socializing while learning. However, this was not the case at the Writing Center. Conversation overflowed the booths in which the tutorials took place; there was curiosity and excitement coming out of their mouths. It was a wonderful thing to observe and be a part of.

At one point I was able to work with two students from Professor Hendrickson’s English 101 class at two different times during the semester. One student was quiet and seemed to lack interest in both the tutorial and her assignment. After reading her essay, I decided to ask her questions to further enhance her argument. Indifference shone through whenever I asked her a question regarding her topic. She repeated a variation of the same answer to every question I proposed. When asking questions didn’t go well, I decided to assign a focused free writing, McAndrew and Reigstad see this particular exercise as beneficial because it “…[focuses] on a portion of the draft that needs development…” (46). However, she did not take to the exercise. Ultimately, what I ended up doing was taking notes on things she had repeated with more emphasis throughout the session and gave that to her so she could work from it. The second student was the complete opposite of the first. As I read over the material he had with him I could tell it was of interest to him. I presented him with a bunch of questions that he could answer throughout his paper to further solidify his argument because all he had was a basic outline of what he wanted his essay to look like. We spent about half hour brainstorming and playing off of our ideas as they came into recognition (48)— McAndrew and Reigstad categorized this notion as “playing your thoughts”, and while no stage or role play was necessary for this technique, the student was satisfied with the amount of work that was achieved. I thoroughly enjoyed tutoring him because I liked the amount of energy he had when it came to discussing his main idea. His enthusiasm made it that much more enjoyable.

During the final peer tutoring session with Professor Alexander’s class, I was fortunate enough to work with a student that was as equally animated about his topic as the second student in Professor Hendrickson’s class. This student was entirely receptive and willing to take whatever feedback I gave him into consideration. While asking him about what some of his concerns in writing are, he confided in me that he had habit of writing what others wanted to read even if he didn’t personally agree with what he was arguing. Another concern for him was making his writing personal. He had attended law school in Brazil and was taught a certain way of writing, it was impersonal and formal. This reminded me of something Regina Foehr said in her tribute to James Moffett, “in academia, we too often take ourselves too seriously…[and we] fear reprisal if we explore the unconventional or write what we really believe” (6). Students are often scared of voyaging into controversial topics or representing them in writing due to the criticism they will receive. While there is safety in tradition, there is innovation in being able to discuss and appropriately correspond to issues that might be considered taboo. The notion of being able to think outside the box is something Moffett advocated. My response to him was to make writing, when necessary, as personal as possible. I encouraged him discuss his ideas freely and to always have enough evidence to prove his point.

There’s this stigma that surrounds tutoring. It says that if a student needs to be tutored it’s because they’re not meeting standard requirements and if they’re not meeting those requirements it’s because they’re not smart enough to. It took me years to realize that this is not true. I first saw this a few years ago when I first began tutoring children. I just couldn’t wrap my mind around the fact that these same children who had a deep understanding of their surroundings were encouraged to seek tutoring. For a long time I didn’t what I was doing with them that their overall performance in school had increased but the children were happy, as were the parents, therefore, I was happy. It wasn’t until around the holiday season that I finally understood what it was that set me aside from their teachers. One of my tutees had written me a lovely message inside of a Christmas card, in a nutshell; she thanked me for being patient with her and for always believing in her. If I had to narrow my philosophy on pedagogy down, it would be that: be patient and believe in your students. There are obviously a lot of other important factors that contribute to effective teaching, but on a more personal level, I believe patience and having confidence in your students is necessary. I want to make a difference in someone’s life just as Ms. Zilelian and Mr. Ross have made in mine. I want to be the reason why someone did not give up.

Case Study: Interesting

My name is XYZ and I am a Humanities Major on a Childhood Education track