Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle’s “Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions: (Re)envisioning First-Year Composition as Introduction to Writing Studies” had a lot to say about first-year composition courses, and rightfully so. My biggest takeaway was the need for inquiry. These courses are taught in a very traditional, two-dimensional manner, focusing on academic writing, which hasn’t helped students in the long run. By moving away from that and using a framework of inquiry, it can get students more invested in their learning, as curiosity lasts longer and goes beyond the classroom. “Teaching students what we know about writing and asking them to research their own writing and the writing of others encourages their self-reflection and mindfulness, thereby improving the possibility that students will maintain a stance of inquiry toward writing as they write in other disciplinary systems” (Downs and Wardle 577).
I also appreciate the notion of community inquiry, leaning into the social aspect of writing. “Developing a ‘community map’ of opinion helps students envision research and argument as community inquiry and identify gaps that their primary research can address” (Downs and Wardle 563). Just as it happens in real life, once you engage with others and their perspectives, it expands your own understanding. It also has the potential to change their beliefs about how much authority they hold in certain spaces, since they are more informed and understand the jargon and discourse that’s taking place within that community. Downs and Wardle are absolutely right that changing this course will better prepare students for their future collegiate writing endeavors.
Wardle was on a roll, because once again she was spot on with “Intractable Writing Program Problems, Kairos, and Writing about Writing: A Profile of the University of Central Florida’s First-Year Composition Program.” Based on classroom conversations, it seems that a lot of what she spoke about are struggles we can see right at Kean. As with so many things, rigidity and formality hold back the potential success students may achieve. If people opened themselves up to change and the idea of student-centered learning, I believe we would see students thrive in writing. “Had they been less flexible, less open, or less willing to change practices, our experiment could have ended as quickly as it began” (Wardle 8). As seen here, without receptivity and a willingness to adapt, no change will ever come. Not only do those in power need to be open to new ideas, but so do those in the classroom implementing them. A curriculum is only as effective as the instructor is, so we need to find a way to make people willing and interested in making changes for the greater good of our students.
Leave a Reply