Sick.

My head feels like a balloon that is somehow attached to the rest of my body. I can breathe out half of my nose; the other half has the sniffles. I will write a legitimate 5060 blog when I can breathe while sitting up.

Trying to remember why I am here.

I am 21 years old, I am in Graduate school, and my head hurts.

I think that 5060 makes me cranky (then again, it might just be school in general). For every theory that we discuss, I find a problem. For every idea we explore to aid our teaching, I find a problem. In every Freshman Composition paper that I grade, I find a problem.

It might be that I am just tired. It might be that I have started work on my final papers/projects. Or it might be that I am thinking too much about teaching Composition, forgetting that, if I do become a professor, they will eventually let me teach classes that I enjoy.

Whatever it is, I feel particularly inclined to remember why I am here.

All of my "Ohio friends," those in my graduating class in high school and those that I met in college, are still exactly where I left them: beginning their Junior or Senior years of college. Goofing off. Doing stupid things. Posting pictures of themselves, drunk and half-naked, on their Facebook without thinking twice about it.

As it has started to grow "colder" here (keep in mind, it was in the thirties in Ohio this week), I am starting to miss my old house, my old friends. Sitting on the porch swing, wrapped up in my comforter, watching the young ghetto kids walk to the bus stop.

I miss Ella Danger, my one and a half-year-old companion, who, according to her father, has learned some interesting behavior. (She "passionately kissed" her doll the other day.) I miss my four male roommates, who are all between the ages of 19-20 and confused. I miss the local market, Yellow Springs, walking to school. I miss being the "problem-solver," and keeping my friends out of trouble.

So, in light of all of this missing, I have been starting to forget why I am here. In Graduate school. When I could be screwing around with the rest of my friends.

In what should have been my Sophomore year of college, I took a course on Contemporary American Fiction with Thomas Leclair, one of the most enlightening professors to have crossed my path. The course met twice a week, we had in-depth quizzes every day, and it was challenging, to say the least.

One day, during our discussion of Toni Morrison's Paradise, (which I recommend, even if you hated Beloved) Leclair mentioned that he wasn't there to teach us, he was there to learn from us. Above all else, he wanted to think about something that he hadn't thought about before. And he wanted us to inspire this.

It was then that I decided that I would like to be a professor.

I do not think that we are there to teach the students everything. I want to learn from my students. I think we are there to make sure that they think, and that they think enough that they find some new idea, some new thing that they can talk about. I want to inspire my students to inspire me.

I am tired, and confused because it is November and still warm outside. I do not know if I will ever nail down a teaching philosophy, but I think I might have just uncovered a chunk of it. And I'm still not sure if I'm here because this is part of my great "life plan," or if this adventure into Graduate school was just "something to do."

I am feeling very pessimistic.

What should a First Year Composition student come to class knowing?

Sadly, I am assuming that they will come to class knowing very little. Truthfully, they could know a lot. They could have infinite knowledge of English. They could be masters of Composition. They could be zombies, for all I know, because these First Year Composition students, for the most part, are incredibly difficult to read.

We are the in the age of technology. Everything is faster, clearer, better. We have knowledge at our fingertips, but at what cost? It seems like everyone wants to rush through life. The First Year Composition students-- most of them do not want to be in the class. The attitude that I have encountered in grading papers and in participating in one First Year Composition course nearly three years ago is this: Get in, get out.

I used to have the same attitude. I did all of my undergraduate coursework in three years. A few short months after finishing my coursework, I came here. And, if I took classes during next summer, I could graduate half a year early. But at what cost?

I think everyone needs to slow down. If students actually came to class and paid attention to what they were learning, if they slowed down enough to stop checking their text messages, to stop looking at the clock, and to actually listen to their Instructors, then I think that maybe we could evaluate the knowledge that they already have. I think that then, maybe, we could look at "what they come to class knowing."

Until then, I think we are going to continue to encounter rooms at least half filled with students that want to get in and get out as soon as possible. They want to go, get their participation grade, and get back to Facebook. Until that changes, until people actually recognize the value of learning, I don't think it really matters what knowledge they may or may not have.

On Teaching Philosophies.

I think that teaching philosophies directly relate to an individual's thoughts on what the students should be learning from the course. As we discussed in class today, a lot of what students learn and how well they learn depends on the attitude of the instructor. Our classroom discussions and experiences working together in our grading groups has definitely shown that everyone has their own idea on how to teach and how to best reach students. We all have different attitudes toward approaching different subjects, as well as varying opinions on what should be taught.

Take today's discussion for example. Should grammar be taught? We read an article that explains that the evidence does not speak in favor of teaching grammar. It is ineffective, and it seems to be a huge waste of time. For some reason, we still teach it, although no one seems to know why. Some people obviously feel that it is important. I am not one of those people, but I already assume that teaching grammar lessons will be a part of the curriculum wherever I work.

In my mind, philosophy, in this case, is equal to attitude. At least, for a beginning instructor, I think this is somewhat accurate. We have not yet had the ability to figure out exactly which theories and practices are most effective, and we have had very little time, if any, to develop methods. We have an idea as to what we want to do and how we want to do it, but very little knowledge of whether or not it will work.

I think that teaching philosophies involve rapid evolution. As we figure out what works and what does not work, our methods change. This affects our overall philosophy, even if we don't realize it. I also think that there are many different teaching philosophies based on many different theories. Every teacher is different. We all approach our classes in different ways.

Another example: grading. Some people believe that we should encourage our students by rewarding them with decent/good grades even if they have made errors (and, sometimes substantial errors). Others believe that the best way to get a student to learn is to set a bar for them to rise up to, and to correct their errors, penalizing them accordingly. Depending on which side of this argument you agree with, you would have a different approach to teaching and a different philosophy.

Personally, I have no definite idea as to what my teaching philosophy is or will be. I'm interested in figuring that out, but I think the best way to assemble a philosophy is through experience.

Pessimistic and Indecisive: my outlook on politics and the upcoming election

I have decided to deviate from this week's prompt. Before reading this, I offer a warning that this is a political ramble that represents my personal thoughts on politics and the election. Please don't hate me.

It is definitely election season. For a short while I was able to ignore the signs popping up along the roads, and the chatter amongst those around me had not yet turned to politics. It is now October and, as my family does prior to every election, I have started receiving phone calls from various relatives reminding me not only that I need to vote, but who I should support this November.

That in mind, two interesting election-related things happened this week. On Tuesday, in 5060, a classmate of mine expressed her astonishment at a statement that someone had made declaring Barack Obama the "Antichrist." On Wednesday, a neighbor of mine decided to explain how Barack Obama is apparently a terrorist. While the first comment did not surprise me, the second did, and I will later detail the conversation and reasoning offered for such a claim.

I must admit that I find politics and personal political preferences to be both interesting and hilarious. During the Bush/Kerry election of '04, a good friend of mine and her mother were horrified at the possibility of Kerry becoming president. They believed that, were this to happen, the Iraqis would come live in America, and everything would go to hell.

We are constantly told that the majority of people identify with a political party based on how they were raised. Whether it be the influence of some event in their lives, their religious background, or the political preference of their parents, many people choose their affiliation for reasons that are incredibly bizarre and often stupid. Most people will align themselves with the side supported by their family unless they have a substantial reason to deviate from the already decided path.

I keep this idea in mind whenever I think about politics. My mother and the majority of her family are Republican Roman Catholics. Although registered as Independents, they are conservative in their actions and voting decisions, and will probably remain this way for the rest of their lives. My father and his family are politically indifferent. My father tends to support the Democratic candidates and ideas, and the dynamic between my mother and father makes for an interesting election season.

I was in Jr. High when W. was elected for the first time. We were required to align ourselves politically and defend our candidate's views. In keeping with my Catholic school education and my relatively conservative family, I stepped up to bat for Bush. My young mind had been taught that killing unborn babies was wrong, and, believing that the Republicans were the only ones that could solve this inherent problem, I supported them.

Four years later, in the battle of Bush and Kerry, I aligned myself with Kerry. Looking back on it, I'm still not entirely sure why. I was fed up with the Bush administration. I had protested the War in Iraq from the very beginning. It was my senior year in high school and I had friends in the Marines, Navy, Army and Air Force. I had friends planning on shipping out shortly after graduation. I had decided that women deserve a choice regarding their bodies and that making abortion illegal would bring about the problems that existed prior to Roe v. Wade. I had friends who were gay or lesbian and wanted to get married some day. Not that any of this really mattered. I wasn't old enough to vote.

Now, four years later, I am pessimistic and indecisive. As I have tried to explain to my mother after she stated she would not support Obama because he supports abortion, the minor issues do not matter much. I no longer feel comfortable supporting a candidate because they align with my beliefs on issues like abortion, gay marriage, women's rights, or the death penalty. It feels as though each candidate takes an opposing stance on these issues for two reasons: 1) they do have some belief on these situations, but 2) they realize that most people hold these moral points as important and will vote on these issues alone.

The "fundamental" issues aside, there are political problems that I believe need attention. I am incredibly irritated with the continuing War in Iraq for multiple reasons. I believe that George Bush, as well as the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana, seriously screwed up during Hurricane Katrina and the situation has not yet been remedied. I think that health care is a problem, and the general system of Social Security both frustrates and confuses me. These are the issues that matter to me. These are the issues that influence my vote.

That said, will any candidate really be able to remedy any of these situations? They could, in the best scenario, attempt to inact some sort of legislature that might influence things in some way. Every time I think about the presidential election and its importance, I remember the statement offered by most: "It's just a figure-head position anyway. They can't do anything unless we support them."

In looking at the debates, statements and positions offered by each candidate it is impossible to tell who will screw up the least. Honestly, in all of the attention that I paid to the Bush/Kerry battle, I did not believe that W. could screw up this bad. Granted, it is unfair to blame the problems of our country on one man, but the War in Iraq definitely did not help. Spending all of the money needed to fund the war did not help. It is my belief that we should be fixing our problems first and in looking at the current economic situation, I don't think that we have effectively done this.

Okay, let's backtrack to the statement offered by my neighbor. Apparently, Barack Obama is a terrorist, and no one knew it. My neighbor bases this statement on no credible information, simply on the fact that Obama's middle name is Hussein, and the idea that his campaign is funded solely or mostly by Afghanistan. I have no idea if either of these statements hold any truth to them, but I highly that they are capable of proving that Obama is a terrorist. The same can be said of declaring Obama as the Antichrist. It is impossible to effectively support this statement. Those that I know who have overheard it have even used the Bible to disprove it.

Now, where exactly am I going with all of these statements? Several places, actually.

One: Voters need to look beyond what they have been taught. You need to look beyond what you have been told and how you have been raised. Instead of listening to what your parents/relatives/religious leaders have told you, look at the "issues," evaluate the problems with our country, and use this to determine where you stand. Pick a candidate not because everyone around you supports that person, but because you really feel like they represent how you feel.

Two: Voters need to effectively determine the weight of an issue. Think about it. Look at the political history of the issue. If it has not changed very much in the past twenty years then it is unlikely to change in the near future. Think about what is important right now. Consider the things that need to be changed immediately. Determine your positions on these issues, and align yourself with the candidate most likely to bring about these changes, even if they may be pro-Choice or anti gay marriage.

I think I now understand voting apathy. It's not that I don't care about the election or the future of my country, but rather that previous leaders have led me to a position where I cannot help but feel pessimistic about the prospect of change. Is it really possible that there is someone out there that does not have their own agenda? Someone who will consider what is best for all of the American people and not just most of them? God, I hope so. I'm pessimistic about it, but God, I hope so.

Avoiding the blog on Theory.

I usually like to complete my blog assignments earlier in the week, but I have spent most of this week avoiding this blog on theory. Admittedly, I am not currently a huge fan of theory. For some reason, I am stuck on practical application when approaching 5060, and I find it difficult to apply most of the theories that we have discussed to the First Year Writing program.

I know, I know. I'm supposed to be thinking about how I will teach and what methods I will use when I am free to torture my students in whatever ways imaginable. But, as I have never actually taught a course, it is difficult for me to move beyond the realm of First Year Writing. And, as we have learned, in such a structured course where the Classroom Instructors only control participation grades and have little control over the structure of their syllabus, it is difficult to completely acknowledge theory as a necessary part of teaching.

My main problem with some theory is this: Something could sound incredibly effective on paper, but, when applied to an actual population, still fail miserably. We discussed this in our1301/1302 lesson-planning workshop last week: One idea may work for one section, but not for an other. Every class has a personality and the Instructor has the delightful task of figuring out what works best for each group of students. In this respect, where do we shove theory?

We discussed in 5060 that learning and commenting on different theories will help give us a better idea of how we want to teach our students. If every group of students is different and needs to be taught in a different way, then it is probable that they will require the practical application of different theories. Or, perhaps, a mixing of theories.

I guess my main concern is this: If someone were to center their teaching style around one particular theory, how would they be prepared to acknowledge and assist the diverse array of students that they would face?

I want to specifically mention that I am not against theory. I have enjoyed, to some extent, reading and discussing the different theories in 5060. And I wholeheartedly think that people should incorporate some sort of theory into their teaching. I just worry that, in looking at the different theories, it would not completely benefit students if we were to approach our classes with one general idea on how to run the show. I feel that we need a diverse appreciation of teaching methods and theories in order to best suit the needs of each individual group.

The Wonderful World of Process.

Oh my. Writing process. Hmm.

My writing process, I have found, is severely enhanced by caffeine. At least, it has been recently. The problem is, I can't drink coffee, and I don't like soda. 80% of the time, I cannot work in complete silence. There has to be some sort of music or noise, a constant noise, otherwise my ears will perk up at every passing car or fly buzzing on the wall. I prefer music, especially Explosions in the Sky, or some other form of instrumental music.

I work better if the internet is far, far away. Yes, it is useful for finding whatever it is that I think I need, but it is also incredibly good at being distracting. In my undergrad, there was a coffee shop that, no matter what, I could not connect my laptop to their wireless. It was awesome! I would haul off to this coffee shop (which was also a bar - score!) and work for hours. Now, I just go sit on my couch. Same effect. Wireless + couch = no. Now, if only the super comfortable couch were not in the same room as the totally awesome DVD collection...

Perhaps I should write about some of my productive process-skills, instead of focusing on my neuroses. I like to write a little every day. Or, a little in the morning, a little in the evening. A few pages here, a few pages there. I am currently completely in love with footnotes and endnotes, so any place where I feel that I need to tie something in, I just add a little note. When preparing for an assignment, I like to set aside a morning to, prior to heading to the library, compile a detailed list of sources and things that I want to look at.

I also like to write a few pages of what I think I am doing and where I think it is going. Sort of a rough version of the assignment, which I will tweak and augment until it is the assignment. For some reason, this usually involves multiple text documents. I may focus on one idea for awhile before switching to another idea, at which point I will find some relevant way to connect these ideas. It really all depends on what I'm writing about and the guidelines of the assignment.

It has dawned on me that, thus far, I have described my writing process for completing academic papers. I guess this makes sense, since I am an American Lit Masters student and not a creative writer, but I do my fair share of creative writing. The process for creative composition is significantly easier for me, as I am usually compelled to write whatever it is I am working on. Something hits me, and I might jot some notes on a piece of paper (usually folded in half and upsidedown) to help me work through the story.

I have never been compelled to write a critical essay. Hopefully, that will happen. Sometime. Maybe.

In writing this entry and responding to a couple of blog posts, I've decided one thing. I'm not sure if process is something we can specifically teach students. Or, rather, I'm not sure process is something that we want to teach students. My process is something that I have come up with entirely on my own. No one "showed me the way." We can, and should, emphasize to students the importance of 1) beginning an assignment ahead of time, 2) prewriting in some fashion, and 3) editing in some way. I think that these are three crucial points that they should incorporate into their individual processes, but I think the rest is up to them.

(I wrote this blog in my office. Which is completely silent. And empty-ish. All I can hear is the sound of the computer, the echoes of voices in the hallway, and my foot tapping.)

Voice.

I think that voice is a tricky subject to address, especially in teaching writing. I'm not sure if I'm totally sold that voice can be taught, or, that a student's authentic voice can be found through a composition course. It is entirely possible that much of my opinion on this subject relies on the idea of getting out of something what you put into it. And, as freshmen, are they willing to try to tackle the difficult subject of voice? My thoughts: probably not. Here's why.

In class, we talked a lot about freshmen composition and what we are trying to teach them. Through this course, they need to learn the fundamental ideas necessary for developing a well thought out and researched argument. Is this reliant on voice? Not really. In most cases, students are applying a formula to their course: passing = x amount of x type of work. Sometimes, they are more concerned with figuring out what the teacher wants them to do and how the teacher is going to evaluate them than they are with learning the material.

In my Chicana Feminisms class, we discussed education and diversity. To fully encompass diversity in education, not only would we have to offer varying opinions and views of things that have happened, but we would have to offer them in a variety of ways. Is this what students want? Not necessarily. Most of the time, they want to know exactly what is going to be on the test, and exactly what they are going to be required to know in order to pass the course. I'll admit, I'm a pessimist, but it's not impossible to admit that most people are not all that interested in actual learning.

I think that voice, and developing and honing one's voice, relies heavily on learning. Learning how phrasing something one way acheives one reaction while another structure may merit a different reaction. It's a matter of whether you want to simply reach your audience, or, reach your audience in the best possible way. I think that most freshmen, who typically consider their audience to be the instructor of the course, are concerned only with getting it done, and not with how effective they have been in completing the assignment or in reaching their audience.

What to Wear. Or What Not to Wear. Or Whatever.

One of the things that I found most interesting, and that I've thought about, was something mentioned at the very beginning of the Take 20 video. When discussing their initial experiences teaching writing, several of the interviewees mentioned that they remember what they wore, or they recall thinking about what they were going to wear. While it sounds silly, or like something you might observe on a television show, I think there is a logical reason behind this. And I know that it is something that I have considered, especially with concern to next year, when I will be in the classroom.

First, let me say that I turned 21 this year. While that is nothing special, a lot of us Classroom and Document Instructors are young. Or younger. :) And some of us, myself included, are close in age range to the people we will be teaching. When considering appearance and the classroom, it occurred to me that, when I begin teaching, I will need some way to distance myself from my students, otherwise they may not listen to me. Then again, it's possible that, as I appear similar to some of them, they may be able to relate to me more. I'm betting it's more likely that they won't take me seriously.

One of the women made an interesting comment, as she said that she thought that if she dressed to impress, they might not notice that she wasn't quite sure what she was talking about. While we all, in some respect, certainly know something about English, we will never know everything. This woman's comment surprised me, as I think that her anxiety about needing to appear as if she has all of the knowledge is becoming outdated. More often, I encounter teachers and instructors and professors who, when they do not know the answer, will admit it and look it up, offering a correct answer at a later date instead of an automatic, incorrect answer.

I agreed with the woman who said that one of the things that she focuses on in teaching writing is teaching students how to use sources. Most students have only gone to the internet, and in going to the internet, have used Google, or Wikipedia, or some other website, and have not explored the online databases available at the college level. I also admired how one person mentioned that they strive to pull their students away from the idea that this is only a required course that they have to suffer through. It can be something they can enjoy; it can be fun. I think that bringing a positive outlook to the table when teaching writing is essential to ensuring an enjoyable experience.

Composition: Why do we teach it?

As Professor Rickly pointed out during Thursday's class, one of the reasons that we teach First Year Writing is because it has always been taught, starting with Harvard and moving on throughout most all Universities. Obviously, as was mentioned, there was reason to begin teaching writing at Harvard, and that is something that I'm interested in exploring.

As every person enters into education and journeys through some school system, they learn a variety of necessary skills. These abilities compile into a database of knowledge, and it is different for every student. Eventually, if they continue through the education system long enough, they arrive at a University, such as Texas Tech. We could blindly assume that every person has learned and perfected the skills necessary for succeeding both on the college level and in their given profession, but we would probably be wrong.

The article that we read for last week stated something along the lines that the professor at Harvard began teaching writing courses because he was encountering students that did not know how to write properly. It may have been that they were taught properly and, having no need to use their skills, simply forgot them or ignored them, or, it may have been that they never received proper instruction. Whatever the case may be, they made it to a higher education institute and still needed writing instruction.

First Year Writing is a way of making sure that every student who walks through our doors possesses the necessary skills to succeed. Chances are, they already have a general knowledge of the fundamentals of writing. Our role in all of this is to assess what they already know and build upon it until they have complete knowledge of the necessary skills. But what are the necessary skills? What do First Year Writing students need to know? Obviously, we need to teach them grammar, and how to write a proper paper, propose a good argument, and back it up with evidence. But we also need to encourage them to understand exactly what it is they are doing and how it relates to the field that they are studying.

By teaching our students how to apply the skills they learn in First Year Writing to the areas they are studying, we are teaching them how to adapt different things to their own understanding. They can learn that they have a voice, that the skills they are learning are useful outside of the realm of "English." We could, theoretically, empower them to take knowledge from the different fields that they may be required to study, and apply them to the knowledge they already possess and the things that they enjoy.

Composition: History and Tradition

Although early emphasis in rhetoric and composition seemed to focus mostly on ways of analyzing and arranging texts and responses to texts, I personally lean more toward the contemporary ideas evolving in the past twenty years. I believe that the writing process is highly personal, even when professional, and that a certain level of the individual must be addressed in order for the piece to work. In essence, the writer must have an interest in what they are writing about. Thus, I feel that the social nature of writing is one of the more important concepts of writing. As people, we are highly social, and it is only natural to consider social influence (race, class, gender, politics) when approaching writing.

I believe that there is an inherent need for an expressive voice in composition, and I definitely agree with the shift in the 1960s toward self-expression. The concept expressive voice goes hand in hand with the first one I chose, as it relies heavily on self-expression, and would most certainly address social matters. While this concept is similar to the incorporation of social influence in writing, I imagine expressive voice to be a more direct display of both social and internal workings. I think that it is incredibly important for students to feel comfortable enough with themselves to develop a voice that they are comfortable using in their writing. Doing so will make writing a more enjoyable process for the students, as, if they are encouraged to develop some sort of personal voice, they will feel a different connection to their work.

Another concept that I believe to be of importance was that of grammar when handled both as correct constructions within writing and as the analysis of style. I think this is an important concept of composition because, obviously, correct grammar is necessary, but it adds another side to consider when teaching students about grammar. In my experience, there are a handful of composition students who will love grammar, and there are those who will flee. By considering that there are multiple sides to grammar, and emphasizing grammar as an analysis of style, it will be possible to attract more interest from the students. I feel that most of the concepts of composition rely on one another, and it is difficult to consider them as individual pieces when it takes most of them to make a whole puzzle.

:)

Introduction.

My name is Alyssa Ryan and I am a first year Masters student specializing in American Literature. I was born in Dayton, Ohio, and until a month ago, Ohio was the only place that I had ever lived. I completed my Undergraduate work in English at the University of Cincinnati in Southern Ohio. My interest in American Literature is twofold: I very much enjoy more Contemporary Fiction, especially when exploring Feminist thought, and more recently, I've been looking into Cajun and Creole Literature.

I like to travel, and some of my favorite cities that I have visited include New Orleans, Seattle and Boston. Visiting places with interesting or unique cultures is something I really enjoy. I obviously enjoy reading, although my Undergrad gave me more than my fair share of British Literature. I'm an avid music listener- I enjoy nearly all music except for most Country. I will admit that some of it is decent, but it is not my favorite thing. My current playlists include everything from Leadbelly to Explosions in the Sky, and I really enjoy Radiohead and Modest Mouse.