Crushing the Teacher's Will and the Student's Voice
In my Composition Theory class, we've discussed the methods the university establishment uses to educate young or novice writers in the discipline. This is what I have gleaned so far. The semester is still progressing, so please do not judge these ideas as concrete or otherwise solid. I am still developing my ideas on this discourse.
- Separate departments require specific jargon in their assignments. For instance, a student wouldn't write a lit paper the same way he would write a history paper or a creative writing paper. A student must use the jargon specific to his department. When the student does not deliver that level of "professionalism" on a "university" level, he gets demolished. The departments do no instruct the students on the required jargon.
- The jargon is there to prove that the student can formally spout the necessary amount of technically correct and typically empty language to be considered more than an imbecile.
- Teach a student to accurately determine which jargon he should use is the job of composition teachers. Instead of focusing on rhetorical theory or critical thinking, composition teachers are reduced to teaching various forms that are not adaptable to each situation.
I also understand the frustrations of students who are forced to jump through a series of hoops since kindergarten in order to be awarded a diploma they can't even use to get a job. I understand their frustration with double standards and the strange sense of inferiority they feel when in the presence of their professors. I understand that conforming to requirements of form can crush a writer's voice so that it is unrecognizable and may not stand on its own again.
I see both sides, because I stand at a strange crossroads. I am tutor and teacher and students and friend. I hope none of you take offense. Offer your feedback and let me know what you think of this debate. I know that Seanachi posted about this the other day, so go give her post (and especially the comments) a look.
So say we all.
Bri
2 comments:
The lowest grade I ever got in an undergraduate class was in my Ancient and Medieval Political Science class. Now, I was a Medieval Studies major, not a Poly Sci student, so I did not have the same grounding or experience writing in that field that others in the class did. With one paper on which I got a D, the professor said that I was obviously a good writer, but I had not constructed a good argument for my thesis. I had not conformed to the structure or style of typical papers in the field.
In other words, it's a lot more than just jargon that differs from field to field, but the whole range of rhetorical tools that need to be learned. But the instructors in each of those disciplines aren't generally equipped to teach writing or rhetoric -- they've specialized in teaching history, or politics, or chemistry or whatever. The whole responsibility for teaching someone how to write is thrust upon the English dept.
I loved my Freshman English class -- I learned more about writing that year than at any other time, and was grateful that I didn't opt out as my AP score would have allowed. But it did nothing to prepare me for writing that Politics paper.
This isn't really an argument of any sort, just what your post made me think of in regards to college writing.
Believe me, I understand your frustration with people who can't seem to put together a simple sentence, or follow basic rules of punctuation. I suppose I shouldn't complain, because it lets me earn my wage editing.
Dude, Bri. I am googling stuff for a grad school assignment, and this page came up.
You should feel impressed.
Post a Comment