In sending out variously tailored job letters and cvs (hm: would that be curricula vitarum?), I’ve realized that I’ve been lucky in the diversity of courses I’ve had the opportunity to construct and teach. Like most folks in my position, I’ve taught the first-year writing staff syllabus at my various institutions, but up to now, I hadn’t understood how few institutions encourage deviation from that staff syllabus. In my MFA and PhD careers, I think I’ve been fortunate to have been given free rein (after a trial run with the staff syllabus) to develop my own ideas about how first-year writing should be taught, and also — by participating in curriculum design committees — to have those ideas affect institutional values. And it’s good, as well, to look at my cv and see that I’ve done things beyond comp; that I’ve designed 200-level experimental writing courses, themed introductory literature courses, 300-level cultural studies examinations of the effects of digital technologies on English studies, and creative writing workshops.

But comp is where I live and my first love. Whatever else I might do, it always comes back to the classroom, and to the theory and practice of teaching first-year writing.

Which is what’s nice about the institution where I’m currently teaching and finishing my dissertation. There’s a strong programmatic attention here to developing good teachers, and part of that attention shows up in the fact that the program’s staff syllabus leaves Unit 4 open to the individual teacher. Unit 1 asks students to make connections between individual experience and societal context, to develop an attention to the recursive nature of writing and response, to critically analyze the particulars of personal experience that are often taken for granted, and to maintain a careful attention to the ways in which audiences might respond to representations of personal experience. Unit 2 asks students to engage with difficult academic texts and analyze the ways in which those texts respond to readerly expectations, and to cite such texts via quotation and paraphrase in service of an original argument that goes beyond the argument of the texts. Unit 3 asks students to examine the overlapping textual conversations on a variety of contemporary topics and then to choose their own topics and use library research to chart and evaluate the parameters of the discourse on that topic in order to secure a position from which they might originally and productively add to that conversation.

And now I’m at Unit 4, and for the first time since 1998, I don’t know what to do. On the part of the program, the openness is an excellent teacher-training move, but for me — with a brilliant bunch of students this semester — I’m having a hard time with figuring out what type of assignment would be most useful to them. As a class, their most significant struggles have been with logical transitions between paragraphs (i.e., carefully using connectors like “however” and “therefore” rather than just repeating words or phrases) and with stylistic innovation (i.e., not sounding purposefully bland), but those are both concerns that we’ve lately addressed in conferences. Furthermore, they’ve demonstrated considerable facility in working with library sources, and a few of them have said they’re tired of doing stuff that they’ve shown they already know how to do.

So if you were me, how would you challenge such a smart bunch? What necessary pedagogical goals for a composition class do you see as missing from my second paragraph, above? (Following this unit, unit 5 is a reflective essay that asks students to perform a retrospective evaluation of their writing over the course of the semester.) What does my syllabus fail to ask them to do that they need to be able to do? What might you suggest for possible Essay 4 assignments?

Here are some from my fine colleagues —

— but none, to me, quite fit my students. They’re brilliant, critical, and ahead of the cultural curve; they’re pop culture before pop culture happens, and at the same time deeply critical of cultural moments five minutes in the past — and, finally, they’re deeply self-conscious of their own quality of contemporaneity.

How might I ask them to critically revise or remix that sense of contemporaneity?


5 thoughts on “Contemporaneity

  • November 12, 2005 at 9:45 am

    It’s just the one life, so “curricula vitae” should do. 🙂

  • November 12, 2005 at 11:42 am

    That’s what I was going to say! The “e” after vita for plural, I thought. (Just what you wanted after that thoughtful lengthy post, right? An answer to the plurality of a CV question. ;))

  • November 12, 2005 at 2:11 pm

    Argh. I shoulda known that. Somewhere, my Latin teacher is scowling at me. But I do know that the ‘e’ — as in ‘vitae’ — is genitive singular rather than nominative plural, to indicate “course of life.” Which I think is why people drop the e when they drop the curriculum and refer to “my vita“: they’re talking about a life, not an of-life.

    OK, so does anybody want to help me with a writing assignment?

  • November 13, 2005 at 12:57 am

    If they are as brilliant as you say they are, why not ask then to tailor their own writing assignments based what most interests each one of them? You could either ask them to develop their own assignment, or you could develop the assignment as a wild card, with whatever parameters you deem fit.

    Or ask them to write an essay that is the complete opposite of what you’ve been teaching them. Or write badly on purpose. Or ask them to interview seniors who had you as a prof and ask them what were the most useful, valuable things that you taught them as freshmen.

    Regarding remixing contemporaneity–have the students take digital photos of themselves and then put a negative filter on them and investigate, in essay form, what has been left out of the picture regarding their examination of themselves in pop culture. Put the photo in sepia filter and ask them to speculate about what part of the contemporary will remain with them in the years to come. Us the idea of filtering as a metaphor.
    Or not.

  • November 23, 2005 at 10:56 pm

    Joanna, I’ve taken your suggestion, in a way: I’ve used the mid-semester evals to put together the Essay 4 assignment. The “wild card” thing would have been unmanageable in terms of evaluative criteria, but I think I’ve managed to combine 80% of my students’ course eval suggestions into something that looks like a workable essay assignment. But, yes, they’re a little apprehensive.

    And that negative filter suggestion is brilliant. That’s gonna be something that gets them started when they don’t know how to revise.

    I’d love to hear any feedback you might offer on the remix assignment.

Comments are closed.