Investigating Pedagogies in Writing Classrooms for English Majors: A Proposal for Teacher Development

1. An Investigation into the Pedagogies Applied to Writing Classrooms for the English Majors and a Proposal for Teacher Development Li, Jie (jieli@bgsu.edu) Xi’an International Studies University

2. Why teacher development? • Writing being a social and academic necessity, and an economic power • English majors unable to write well • Philosophies and pedagogies: dated or not appropriate

3. Research on composition in China: texts, student performance (e.g.TEM-4, TEM-8) • Williams (2003):“Focusing on methods without an understanding of the historical andtheoretical foundations of rhetoric is shortsighted” (p.3) • Pedagogical foundation: education linguistics, and psychology, and technology.

4. Research methods • Literature: articles on English writing from the four conferences held in China from 2003-2006 • Class observation • Experiment: writing classes in regular classroom and in the digital environment • Questionnaire • Interviews: writing teachers and specialists

5. Findings: class observation • Writing classes: mostly teacher-centered, product-based, exam-oriented • Procedure: rules for writing, samples, writing after class, teacher grading and comments • Emphasis: product, not process • Rhetoric: no analysis of audience awareness, purpose, style, tone

6. Findings: class observation • Research (writing to learn): not stressed, unfamiliar with documentation format, academic honesty hard to put into practice • Comments given by instructors: just weaknesses; some not justified • Rhetoric: no analysis of audience awareness, purpose, style, tone

7. Findings: interview • Heavy workload • No pre-training before teaching • Students failing to follow the rules, don’t correct errors. • TEM-4/8: very influential, affecting daily instruction • Assessment by the end of the term: timed essay test

8. Findings: questionnaire • Writing: very difficult • Help not available when needed • Class in the computer lab: good, information easily available, feedback, collaboration • Drawbacks in the lab: students out of control, emailing, chatting online, etc.

9. What’s rhetoric? Herrick (2001): “the art of employing symbols effectively” (p. 7) George Kennedy: “a system of signs, including language”, such as sound, images, graphics, etc.

10. Role of rhetoric in comp. studies Its value is that helps writers with planning, adapting to an audience, shaping human motives, responding to a situation.

11. How to acquire rhetoric? • Rhetoric could be acquired through “systematic study and intentional practice of effective symbolic expression” (Herrick, 2001).

12. Major rhetorical schools and their features • Current-traditional rhetoric: structure • New rhetoric: process • Romantic rhetoric: self-expression • Writing across the curriculum: different conditions; content • Postmodern rhetoric: “liberation” from theories; cultural studies

13. Discussion • Problem with teachers Lack of linguistic tolerance: no one standard language Lack of awareness of students’ interests Lack of teacher accountability Lack of updated professional training

14. Discussion • Problem with teaching philosophy Current-traditional rhetoric: emphasis on structure, no real practical value • George Hillocks (1986): “the current-traditional approach is not very effective in teaching students how to write. Nevertheless, it is the most influential and widely used approach to teaching writing today.”

15. Neglect of the social function of writing Writing being a private instead of a public action. Bottom-up methodology: part of whole essay

16. Discussion • Insufficient pedagogical strategies MODE OF INSTRUCTIONEXPERIMENTAL/ CONTROL EFFECTS George Hillock(1988) Natural process .18 Individualized .16 Presentational .02 Environmental .44

17. Discussion • Insufficient knowledge of rhetorical history and pedagogies Unable to teach with flexibility or with a combination of approaches Apposition to computer and other technologies in the writing classroom, because of extra work

18. Discussion • Twelve main pedagogies in A Guide to Composition Pedagogiesby Gary Tate, et al 1. process 2. expressive 3. rhetorical 4. collaborative 5. cultural studies and composition 6. critical

19. 7. feminist 8. community-service 9. WAC 10. basic writing 11. technology 12. writing center

20. Discussion • Unscientific administration of the writing course No WAC (writing across the curriculum) Heavy workload Large student population Outcomes not in the first priority Improper assessment

21. Proposals and conclusion • Core of writing class • Teach critical thinking ability • Try different or a combination of pedagogies in writing classrooms • Use technology to facilitate writing process: a hybrid class • Require students to produce multiple drafts and revise according to the feedback • Provide individualized instruction or tutoring, such as the Writing Center practice.

22. Proposal and conclusion • Encourage collaboration • Provide opportunities for students to write for different audiences • Stress the role of reading and research • Teach writing through writing, and try to involve students in staged writing activities • Try workshop-based writing classes

23. Lindemanne in A Rhetoric for Writing Teachers (1995): Writing teachers should “help students gain confidence in their ability to use the code [the language used in compositions] effectively, perhaps even to find pleasure in manipulating the symbols” (p. 17).

24. References Covino, W. A. (2001). Rhetorical pedagogy. InG. Tate, A. Rupiper & K. Schick (Ed.), A Guide to Composition Pedagogies (pp.36-53).New York: Oxford University Press. Herrick, J. A. (2001). The history and theory of rhetoric. (2nd ed.) Allognd Baca Kinloch, V. F. (2005). Revisiting the promise of Student’s Right to Their Own Language. College Composition and Communication. September 57, 83-113. Lindemann, E. (1995). A rhetoric for writing teachers. (3rd ed.) New York: Oxford University Press.

25. References Moran, C. (2001). Technology and the teaching of writing. InG. Tate, A. Rupiper & K. Schick (Ed.), A Guide to Composition Pedagogies (pp. 203-224). New York: Oxford University Press. Williams, J. D. (2003). Preparing to teach writing: Reseuarch, theory, and practice.3rd ed.New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Professional development: Planning for success.Retrieved 4 May 2007 fromhttp://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/index.jsp/ Zemelman, S., & Daniels, H. (1988). A Community of writers: Teaching writing in the junior and senior high school. Heinemann: Portsmouth.