In “Revisualizing Composition: Mapping the Writing Lives of First-Year College Students (MSU WIDE report),” the following question was posed: “What counts as writing” (4). With the multitude of students with diverse writing engagement experiences, I still attempt to find a concrete answer to this question. I try to allow my students to experiment with different modes of writing (allowing some flexibility with writing assignments), but simultaneously, I find that I place stipulations on certain requests. Last semester, my introductory composition course completed a group project in reference to the documentary Digital_Nation. A component of the project was in relation to a written essay. One student asked if his group could submit the essay in “Virtual World” conversation format, as their project focus was in reference to the benefits of virtual worlds. I dismissed the request, as I was interested in receiving a typical formal document. As I reflect on the situation, I ask myself, why? Why didn’t I allow this opportunity? The MSU WIDE report noted that students spend a significant amount of time writing in electronic avenues. Thus why didn’t I allow my student’s group to submit their essay in virtual world written format?The MSU WIDE report implied that students possibly devalue certain electronic written content (such as SMS text messages and social environment posts) because of the perceived valued attachment to traditional written content (academic essays). This is an accurate assumption. My further implication is that this is a learned behavior. Students are taught the procedures of writing at an early age (grade school). These procedures include stringent semi-antediluvian rules. These rules (standards of formality) continue to increase as academic years increase. Thus students’ perceptions are based on these instructional practices. Writing via electronic avenues like SMS text messaging and social websites is not a part of these procedural instructional practices. Therefore, students “learn’ to devalue written content outside of tradition.
The “Revisualizing Composition: Mapping the Writing Lives of First-Year College Students (MSU WIDE report),” findings allowed me to re-se my own teaching practices. I truly believe that all written content is valuable. However, I did not recognize my personal thought-action-based dichotomy. There is a lack of coherence between my personal belief and teaching style. If I truly value writing, then I would value all modes of writing. If I truly value writing, then I would make some classroom “space” for variant written pieces.
Insightful self/student assessment. I agree that it's one thing to tell yourself that all writing has value, and another to hold to those ideas in the face of ingrained ideas of what constitutes "legitimate" writing. Thanks for teaching through your experience.
ReplyDeleteThis is a powerful reflection, Shenika. I too was inspired to revisit what kinds of biases I might have about certain genres and certain ways of composing those genres when we crunched the WIDE survey data.
ReplyDeleteI was surprised to learn that Facebook can be a "serious" writing space - that is, a place where folks do writing for their classes, etc. - and then I was immediately surprised at myself for discounting it without bothering to ask why. :)