This week, we’re learning about national standards. As an educator, I’ve spent a lot of time reading standards, but never for higher education. I look forward to learning what they look like in this environment and what we’re expected to learn throughout our college experience.
First, I started with the Council of Writing Program Administrators’ Standards for First-Year Composition, which is our ENG 1030 course. In the introduction, I found it interesting that it identifies the objectives as outcomes, not standards. However, what’s really the difference? Though the language differs, in my mind, they’re both doing the same job. Anyway, unlike people in our class, I don’t remember taking this course. I know I did and can look back on the things I wrote, but I have no recollection of the specifics of the course. Even so, this document highlighted things I know I didn’t learn. For example, the emphasis on utilizing a variety of technologies for composition. What should that have looked like? I don’t believe I experienced a variety of technologies. Other things I don’t believe I learned were nonverbal elements in writing, redesigning texts, flexible reading strategies, synthesis writing, and negotiating genre conventions. The only reason I feel strongly about not learning these things is that some of these skills, such as synthesis writing or reading strategies, are things I vividly remember learning more recently. I also found it interesting that the document emphasizes students learning about writing within their fields. Though this is important, it’s unrealistic. ENG 1030 consists of students from all majors, so tapping into the qualities of writing within their field is incredibly hard, since you’re serving such a wide range of students. Though these outcomes are good in theory, I genuinely don’t believe they’re all being addressed in first-year composition courses.
Next are the Conference on College Composition & Communication’s Principles for the Postsecondary Teaching of Writing. I agree with everything they have to say and believe these principles would improve the educational system. Reading should be just as important as writing, as both are essential to life and to deepening understanding within courses. As someone who has spent a lot of time studying and researching language and its impact and limitations within education, I agree that educators and the system itself should be more conscious of how language is used in educational settings. As mentioned, technology is ever-evolving, and we as educators need to embrace it and find ways to utilize it in an ethical, beneficial manner, as it can improve the educational experience. The last point I’d like to highlight is that the reading acknowledges that writing instruction should be flexible. Writing, and education as a whole, isn’t a one-size-fits-all process, and educators should be mindful of that during instruction. This should be taken into consideration not only during instruction but also within assessments, by instructors and assessment agencies. All of these principles should be implemented in institutions and classrooms so we can teach students in a more effective manner.
Lastly, the National Council of Teachers of English’s Standards for the Assessment of Reading and Writing. I agree with these standards and believe they’re good in theory, but I don’t believe all of these principles are reflected in assessment. Before diving in, I want to acknowledge that I’m thinking of assessment on a larger scale, such as standardized testing. Anyway, let’s start with the standard that assessment should primarily improve teaching and learning. Though that might be the intention, the reality is that standardized testing does more harm than good. Something else that stood out to me is that assessment should be fair and equitable. Anyone in the education field knows that isn’t true. You can easily see the inequalities when you look at our ESL students or disabled students. Accommodations aren’t always made accessible for certain students, which automatically makes assessments inequitable. (Let’s not even get started on how the language and the actual assessment itself aren’t equitable.) The last point I want to highlight is the standard stating that students should have an equal voice in the development of assessment. Students aren’t aware of their authority and power, so they don’t use it. If they were, we either wouldn’t have assessments, or they would look completely different.
Leave a Reply