The readings made me think twice about my approach to
teaching composition. In English 101, I was following a traditional linear
process with a strict plan-write-revise sequence (Perl 141) while working on
revising students’ first draft. We talked about the functions of revising and
using multiple drafts according to the textbook, but did not talk about
recursive process in the process of writing. I’m thinking to spend some time to
discuss the process when we start writing essay 2.
Also, the reading pointed out the importance of a writer’s
first thought, felt sense (Perl 142). Perl states the felt sense is found in
the process of “when writers are given a topic, the topic itself evoke a felt
sense in them” (143). For the next essay, I’m thinking of spend more time to
work on prep work before they start writing, so that, when they get stuck, they
can draw themselves back to the point to think of if it is what they really
meant throughout the process of writing.
Harris and Silva’s reading gave me some tips on how to
address ESL students’ writing in my class. As discussed in the reading, I will
keep in mind that teachers need to find out what they are really struggling
with in their paper. Harris and Silva say, “without any knowledge of cultural
preferences tutors are likely to see difference as weaknesses and to assume
that the ESL student needs basic writing help” (505). In my class, I have
students who write their essay in the discourse of their first language. We may
not be able to talk about writing in English with English discourse in class.
But, I will definitely have the talk with them in a one-to-one setting since they
need to be aware of it to success academically and socially.
Yuki,
ReplyDeleteAs an ESL teacher, responding to your thoughts on the Harris and Silva piece may seem the obvious choice, however, it was how you responded to the Perl article that struck me and how I might approach an aspect of my teaching differently. You quoted Perl’s comment about how a topic evokes a felt sense in the student (Perl 143) and how you will spend more time on prep work next time. I felt the same way about aspects of this article and how in one of my writing classes that focuses on argumentation, how I, through trial and error, have resorted to giving the students a very limited choice of arguments to write an essay on. I have assumed their ‘felt sense’ was simply, “which one will be the easiest for me” so I then rush them into a thesis. I think for me to have such low expectations, also leads me to believe I may being making the assumption that my students are all “unskilled writers” simply because they are second language learners. I think the recursive movement occurs with them as with first language writers, however, I think I have always discounted and never allowed what Perl calls the third movement. (142). She implies (I think) all writer experience this, but I haven’t ‘listened’ for it with my students. Like you pointed out in your blog post, more time spent in allowing the student to “call forth images, words, ideas, and vague fuzzy feelings…” (Perl 143) may do more good for our students and for our part in facilitating their writing.
I don’t have much to add to your response for Lockhart and Roberge, only that I agree with the first part and if I were to answer your question about teaching philosophies, yes! I think the best philosophies are a fusion of theories and best practices. I think the philosophy itself is fluid, both as a document and as the mental philosophy that drives each lesson plan, each interaction with a student, and your classroom environment.
Excellent, Yuki--I'm glad that these readings seem valuable for you in your practice, and that you have been able to locate yourself within Lockhart and Roberge's framekworks.
ReplyDelete