I signed up for a summer course about teaching composition at the community college. In my mind, I expected to have debates about best practices and how to get students to produce multiple drafts with real revision. So far, the class has been focused on debates within the academic community about what should be taught in a first year composition class. I've read numerous articles spouting at least four viewpoints on the subject. I have to admit that I'm shocked that people are actually arguing over this kind of thing. After several weeks of reading and discussion, students have been asked for a short position paper on their feelings about teaching first year composition. Here is mine.
After 18 years of teaching writing in a secondary classroom, the idea of debating how to teach (which tasks, presentations, questions, etc. are best practices) seems inevitable. However, the idea that scholars sit around debating what to teach in a writing course is a foreign concept. Who knew that some people advocate focusing on literary texts while others are in favor of studying social dilemmas (especially those related to oppression) and still more are interested in teaching technicalities like grammar and sentence structure? In the midst of this three-ring circus, what is a writing teacher to do? Perhaps, just teach writing.
While I prize literature as a look into man’s psyche, a commentary on the human condition, and a peephole into myriad lives I’ll never live, it should not be the focus of a composition class. This is a content area best left to literature classes where the focus is stated up-front: American Literature of the Twentieth Century or British Romantic Poetry. Composition classes should be about composition. If they are not, students are short-changed because their writing is not judged on the basis of their ability to clearly communicate an idea, but rather “by how sophisticated or insightful the teacher finds the interpretation of the relevant artifacts to be” (Fulkerson 662). Literary interpretation works for a literature class, but not for a composition class. This does not mean that students should never be asked to read or respond to a piece of literature, which is valuable in teaching them how to write a literary analysis essay or critique, but it does mean literature should not be the focus of a writing course. It also means that the literary analysis essay in a composition course should not be evaluated on the interpretation of the literature, but on the student’s ability to communicate his interpretation.
Likewise, composition courses should not be focused on political agendas that presume some type of oppression and a need for rebellion. Every generation grapples with the idea that those in power are oppressing them in some way and that it is up to individuals to bring about change in society. This is not an idea that needs to be furthered in a composition class because its goal is to teach writing skills, not to further a political agenda set by the instructor. This type of class is a nightmare which most of us have suffered through, eventually capitulating to whatever view the teacher requires. I recall a vivid example of this type of thought in an undergraduate creative writing class. The professor deemed some of my work unacceptable because I focused on the traditional role of women in Southern families without reviling it as antiquated and chauvinistic. Ever concerned about my g.p.a., I revised the pieces as directed which made her happy but caused me to lose interest in the class, waste time writing pieces I eventually discarded, and resent her force-fed opinions. This experience taught me little about writing but volumes about teaching. Good instructors are those who can allow students to have their own views and critique the writing itself in terms of clarity, word choice, structure, and tone.
All of this discussion of what writing classes should not be ultimately leads to the question of what they should be. This question is well-addressed in the “WPA Outcomes Statement for First-Year Composition” which focuses on the skills students need to be successful in college. After all, that is the point of a basic composition course – to teach students how to write for an academic audience. It is highly appropriate that the document begins with a section on rhetorical knowledge emphasizing the students’ ability to build an argument and respond to many types of prompts across the curriculum. In addition, the idea of asking students to think critically about writing is important. However, thinking critically can occur in conjunction with any topic, not just literature and social issues. For example, my favorite topic to write about is food. This may seem like fluff to many people, but to me food is the basic construct of life. It can inform people about culture, farming practices, weather, industrialization, creativity, history, and a thousand other topics. Questions about why some foods are eaten instead of others or what caused particular foods to be valued can be addressed through careful research and critical reading. Thus, allowing students to learn writing and thinking skills through their own passions is certainly an important idea because it avoids touting a political agenda, hooks new learning to prior knowledge, and helps students see that writing can help them bring deeper meaning to their lives through exploration of their personal interests. Of course, if students are interested in political and social notions those, too, are acceptable as long as they are not forced on anyone.
Just as the idea that writing is best taught through reading and interpretation, the idea that writing is best taught through mechanics (as proffered by Fish) is limiting. While good writing does follow the edicts of Standard English, having technically correct sentences does not necessarily produce clear thesis statements or build well-supported arguments. These come with the study of structure in writing and the integration of research texts with students’ own thoughts.
Ultimately, views of a writing class as the basis for a political movement or as merely the study of language technicalities live at opposite ends of the writing spectrum with common sense and good practice somewhere between. A little bit of any approach is probably not going to hurt anyone. After all, learning how to write a literary analysis essay and how to correctly write complex sentences are both valuable skills. But the most important question in this debate over first year writing courses is what will actually help students the most. The answer to that is a focus on the elements of good writing: clarity of thought, carefully chosen words, skillfully crafted structure, and an awareness of task and audience. These are the ideas which should be taught in freshman composition, not content best left for literary explorations, social debates, or grammar courses.
