NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/bit/listserv/mbul/6173

Text File | 1992-12-22 | 2.8 KB | 47 lines

Comments: Gated by [e-mail]
Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!paladin.american.edu!auvm!ASUACAD.BITNET!IACDES
X-Envelope-to: [e-mail]
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:05:30 -0700
Sender:       "Megabyte University (Computers & Writing)" <[e-mail]>
From:         "David E. Schwalm" <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Re: Standard English
In-Reply-To:  note of 12/21/92 22:10
Lines: 33

Marcy, you're caught in a classic bind. If you are going to have a writing
program (with program goals and objectives) rather than a collection of
writing courses in which each instructor does his or her own thing, you have
to develop a set of competencies and a standard syllabus. And the more
sections you have taught by novices or marginally trained faculty, the more
rigid the std syllabus and the std assignments have to become. When I started
to review the assignments instructors were giving here when I first came, I
realized that I would have to tighten the program up (or down) a little. Most
of the assignments were either trivial or silly, undoable, totally unrelated
to academic enterprises, and purposeless. And there was enormous variability:
in one class students got to compare breakfast cereals or family members,
while in another students had to read complex essays and compare different
writers' views on abstract topics. The degree of difficulty of this writing
ranged wildly. You can have a looser program if you have instructors who are
knowledgeable about writing and rhetoric and who have established and agreed
to sensible goals for a required college writing course. But who's got a staff
like that? We have a pretty rigid program. We have posited certain goals and
values in our courses; we have developed syllabi and assignments that should
help students reach those goals; we help our TAs and part-timers acquire
students centered teaching methods; and we try to make the case for our
approach on the basis of good theory and good practice. We feel that our
novice instructors are able, in this way, to provide a solid writing course
for their students and to learn a great deal themselves about the teaching of
writing. Eventually, they can become a bit more creative, after they have a
better idea of what they are doing. (Most of the "creative" assignments I have
seen from new TAs were actually pretty bad writing assignments.) So, given the
resources our universities are willing to devote to writing instruction, I
don't think we need to be too apologetic about being a little rigid.

-- David E. Schwalm, Assoc. Provost for Academic Programs
___Arizona State University West
___4701 West Thunderbird Rd.
___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500