Eric Ames · October 31, 2011 at 5:23pm

I attended a public panel discussion not too long ago on the subject of curriculum reform sponsored by the Society for the College, an organization for which I happen to serve on the board. A particular point of contention among faculty was whether or not there should be some sort of writing composition requirement, something that both the Society and panelist Michael Poliakoff of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni support.

Poliakoff's criticism was not welcomed by the faculty who were at this meeting. The faculty, as well as Teresa Longo, our Dean of Educational Policy, insisted that writing was taught by "embedding" it in the instruction of other courses. Instead of completing a Writing 101 type class as students used to some decades ago, today's students complete a Lower Division Writing Requirement- typically in the form of a freshman seminar- and an Upper Division Writing Requirement in the form of a senior colloquium. Students are apparently supposed to absorb this writing ability throughout their coursework without taking a specific writing class.

There is, of course, a tiny snag with this whole setup. It doesn't work. I have had maybe one professor actually take serious instruction time to teach us about quality writing, and his advice boiled down to "read Strunk & White." Sure, the quality of my writing has improved over the last three years, but only because I have figured out what works and what doesn't. If professors are teaching us how to write, they are so brilliantly subtle that no one has noticed. To be honest, I don't want history professors to teach me how to write; I would much rather that they teach history.

No matter how tedious it may be, a lot of students would probably benefit from some kind of composition requirement. If we assume that writing skill is important, it is far better for it to be taught on its own than for professors to awkwardly cram it in next to their research interests. Both my freshman seminar and my upper level seminar were quite writing intensive, and were taught by good professors, but apart from consulting on the content of our papers, we were never given advice on good writing. I suspect a large part of the problem is getting people to spend two and half hours per week teaching composition.

Comments:


tabula rasa
Joined
Jun '10
tabula rasa

Not having had the time to read the whole thread, let me add something that has likely already been addressed.  One of the problems with writing is lack of reading. Young people who are reasonably intelligent who read a lot can't help but begin to see what well-constructed sentences and paragraphs look like.  Television is nothing but a negative for writing skills.

Second, I fully subscribe to the "butts in chairs" method.  People learn to write better when they write a lot (and then get edited by competent teachers).

Third, I wish I could find the quote, but one writer on writing said that clear thinking leads to clear writing.  Vague, illogical thinking becomes vague, illogical writing.  I am always amazed by the clarity of Victor Davis Hanson's writing.  He is a talented writer, but it begins with clear thought. He knows exactly what he intends to say--then he says it very well.

Dan Hanson
Joined
Aug '10
Dan Hanson

In the 1980's, the Alberta government instituted a writing competency exam which had to be passed by the 3rd year of college or you would be kicked out of school. 

The test was a simple 400 word essay, on one of several subjects.  You were allowed several errors of spelling and grammar - the main goal of the test was to show that you could start a topic, then construct a few paragraphs that stayed on topic and led to some form of reasonable conclusion.

Huge numbers of students failed.  I was a marker for that exam, and some of the efforts were shockingly bad: so bad I couldn't believe these kids had graduated high school and had been accepted to University.  The ones who failed had to take 'bonehead' English in their first year, and they had to write the exam again, as many times as necessary, until they passed.

Long story short, by the 2nd year after the exam was introduced, hundreds of students were about to be kicked out of college because they still couldn't construct a reasonable 400 word essay. 

So what did the government do?  It quietly withdrew the exam requirement.  Problem solved.

Mark Wilson
Joined
May '10
Mark Wilson

(This joke works best spoken aloud rather than written.)

I used to be so dumb, I used to think "collejje" was spelled with only one j.

Edited on November 1, 2011 at 6:56am
Annefy
Joined
Oct '11
Annefy

I have only skimmed the comments so apologize if my point has already been covered. Comparing my four children's Catholic school education to numerous nieces and nephews public school education, I see a couple of issues: 1) many teachers of subjects other than writing are unskilled writers. 2) teachers have to read every word of every composition to make the necessary corrections. This is time consuming and can't be outsourced (a math teacher, for instance, can hand the key and tests to a volunteer for correction) ... 3) ... which is why teachers don't assign many writing assignments. My four children did more writing in their k-8 education than my nephews and nieces did in k-12. Learning to write clearly forces a person to think clearly. I know a lot of 20-somethings who can do neither.

Goldgeller
Joined
Aug '11
Goldgeller

One of my big struggles with writing, when I was writing seriously (in college), was the argument between grammar and style. I had pretty good grammar (now I have to think harder about keeping my verb tenses straight!). What most teachers called "good writing" what was actually "their preferred styling." I don't necessarily want to be lectured on style. In high-school, our english teacher would dock points after the second usage the verb "to be." That's teaching a specific style. 

However, a lot of college students don't write very well, in terms of grammar or style. 

How should we deal with this? Well, I don't know. There are good and bad reasons on both sides of the argument as to whether the teacher should care or not. 

I want to second a comment that someone else made-- Ricochet is an excellent writing and thinking exercise for me. I tend to let myself "stretch out" when I think and write. The 200 word limit sometimes seems tight to me, but the 200 word limit forces me to chose my most important thoughts, and to be concise about it. This is a good challenge for me.

J. D. Fitzpatrick
Joined
Oct '10
J. D. Fitzpatrick
Annefy: I have only skimmed the comments so apologize if my point has already been covered. Comparing my four children's Catholic school education to numerous nieces and nephews public school education, I see a couple of issues: 1) many teachers of subjects other than writing are unskilled writers. 2) teachers have to read every word of every composition to make the necessary corrections. This is time consuming and can't be outsourced (a math teacher, for instance, can hand the key and tests to a volunteer for correction) ... 3) ... which is why teachers don't assign many writing assignments. My four children did more writing in their k-8 education than my nephews and nieces did in k-12. Learning to write clearly forces a person to think clearly. I know a lot of 20-somethings who can do neither. ยท Nov 1 at 8:00am

My high school reduced the teaching load for the English department from the standard five classes to four. And get this: the English department still didn't have the smallest student load. Anyone who teaches English conscientiously has a very tough row to hoe; administrators have got to start taking that into account. 

Glenn the Iconoclast
Joined
Apr '11
Glenn the Iconoclast

I'm not working on a degree, just taking some classes, so I did not have to take Writing I/WRT101, but I did so anyway.  (As it was explained to the class, it is mandatory to pass Writing I with at least a C+ to get a degree at any Arizona college or university.)  The professor had done her master's at the U of A, so I looked it up.  Something to do with Indian poetry.  I would have read it if it was available online, but didn't feel like going through the 'fiche at the library.

I can't say that I got anything out of her class.  I don't expect to ever use MLA-style references in the real world, and if I need to, I'll check a style handbook.

But it's very possible that the freshmen in my class learned something.  Many of them would almost have had to, because the essays we shared for peer-review were atrocious.  Not uniformly bad, but much worse than I expected from college students.

But ... there was hardly any writing taught.  I think the only mechanic was proper use

(more)

Glenn the Iconoclast
Joined
Apr '11
Glenn the Iconoclast

of the semi-colon, and then there was some stylistic stuff on constructing a narrative, and that was it.  After getting back my first paper with the notation, "Your writing is clear and competent," she seldom commented on my work, except to change my conservative "Moslems" and "Hindoos."  Presumably she was spending more time with the students that needed her help.

  

Glenn the Iconoclast
Joined
Apr '11
Glenn the Iconoclast
tabula rasa: One of the problems with writing is lack of reading. Young people who are reasonably intelligent who read a lot can't help but begin to see what well-constructed sentences and paragraphs look like.

You beat me to it.  I subscribe to the H. Allen Smith school of writing as explained in How to Write Without Knowing Nothing.  Read, then write.  Repeat.

Also you can't go wrong paying attention to Twain writing on the literary sins of James Fenimore Cooper.

(And yes, those are the two hobby-horses I ride whenever I comment on writing.  :-) )

Ben Hurst
Joined
Jan '11
Ben Hurst

I actually learned a great deal about writing in college, but nothing from my school-mandated English Comp 1 class. I learned from a few blessed professors who took their jobs seriously, both in literature and economics. EComp served only to indoctrinate freshman into the study of victimhood: while male oppression of everyone else that continues (no, accelerates) to this day. Oh, and it was taught by a career TA. 

Crow's Nest
Joined
Mar '11
Crow's Nest

No, sadly, it does not. 

One does wonder, though, why it should be necessary for them to do so. In which case we can render the question in the title even more broadly: Do schools teach children to write? (we presume here, with Aristotle, that "to write" obviously means to write well, thus rendering the adverbial modifier tautological).


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading

Start your shopping here!

Help support Ricochet by making your purchases through our Amazon links.

Welcome Visitor!
Join  or  Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Ricochet: The Right People, The Right Tone, The Right Place.  Join today!

Already a Member? Sign In