QQC 7/27

1) I very much enjoyed the Wysocki text about the multimedia of text. I identify as a visual learner so I can appreciate the conversation that Wysocki illustrates in terms of translating design and visual thinking in composition. I think students very much benefit from reflection on things such as font, spaces, and aesthetic appearances of writing. My main question for Wysocki's work would be how can we implement this thinking into our own course design and instruction? How can we foster a better awareness in our students for the ways in which they are influenced by visual design and aesthetics in their everyday lives. I think to my internship in which students ask the question is Instagram a genre? And I think that this question reflects the way in which contemporary culture can sometimes be desensitized to the importance of multimedia texts.

2) I enjoyed coming back to Yancey's ideas on portfolio evaluations. I think this article comes at a good time in the semester when we have had opportunity to observe classes and reflect on teacher-student interactions. I feel that Yancey's self-reflexive approach can serve as an important answer to student's "product-based" thinking. For example, I observed in my own internship a high level of anxiety in students when they were faced with the prospect of evaluation even for rough drafts. So my question for Yancey would be "How can we give students confidence about their writing and encourage them to be reflexive even within the drafting process?"

QQC

1. What is your opinion on the suggestion made by Reiff concerning teaching writing through contextual genre theory? Would you apply it to your classroom? Why or why not?

2. Had you realize the role that other media have in writing genre according to what is brought up by Wysocki? How would you incorporate this aspect of genre to your classroom?

QQC THURSDAY

1) Yancey says that portfolios have three key characteristics: longitudinal in nature, diverse in nature, almost always collaborative. While I agree with the first point, I don’t know that they have to be diverse or collaborative. Do you think they have to be diverse and/or collaborative?

2) How do we teach genre to students for fake genres such as the literacy narrative? Simply by acknowledging it is not a real genre and providing examples from past students? Inspire they do something "new"? Have them guess? Put together what they know about literacies and/or narratives? Hmmm.

QQC 7/26

Reiff introduces her article in a self-aware and meta way, giving a step-by-step analysis of what she went through in formulating and confronting the very essay the reader is reading. Her first example in the essay, though, is from an advanced composition course with a student who may be more keyed into meta-cognitive theory and better equipped to self-analyze. How formal should our expectations be of the way in which students in early composition courses tackle assignments from a genre lens? How reflective can we expect them to be in the process of coming up with a topic?

In reference to Wysocki, I have always been interested in design, but how can we as composition teachers better incorporate and teach design elements as part of a rhetorical situation? Although I believe we are familiar with certain aspects of the discipline, our knowledge of this area may be less formal than that of someone who studied typography or graphic presentation. 

QQC Blog July 26 Kristy

As Yancey suggests, waiting to the last to grade portfolios until closer to the end and make a holistic assessment of the finished products (110-111). However, she does claim that some teachers prefer to grade along the way and make it clear that revisions can improve grades (111). Does this work? I mean I can visualize conferences with students regarding the components of their portfolios where they receive constructive feedback, but can they also have grading all along as a tentative numerical value based on the way the component stands without revision? Is this counterproductive or does this encourage revision?

Conform or not to conform to genre constructions and conventions? That is the question I ask after reading Reiff’s article. While I understand that genre is not static, I also understand the need for certain boundaries for form, structure, and adherence to the conventions surrounding genres. What I do not understand in Reiff’s argument is are we encouraging “antigenre” (161-162) or are we encouraging students to “resist genres by creating alternatives” (161)?

QQC 7/26

Q1:

Devitt follows some fifty years of popular contemporary theory and criticism in her road to the conclusion, "the recurrence of situation cannot be a matter of material fact but rather what Miller calls 'an intersubjective phenomenon, a social occurrence'" (578). In this vein of thought, does the primacy placed on linguistic mediation necessarily preclude the pre-linguistic? Is it possible to have--as the popular "nature versus nurture" argument might be answered by "both"--a both/and approach to genre, rather than Devitt's either/or? What might this look like?

Q2:

What Reiff demonstrates that we've seen often in other Rhet/Comp articles this session is an intentional disclosure of the author's meta-cognitive process of and about the writing act performed: rather than focusing on content alone, she aims to express and expose the steps that led to that content. How does this compare to our responsibilities as tutors in the writing center or instructors of the ENC courses? Of course this is a broad question, but as you anticipate how you intend to teach students how to think about writing, how do you predict this type of writing might frame your praxis?

QQC 7/27

Devitt talks about genre as a "template" for writers, but I'm curious, when y'all write (preferably something that isn't academic) which comes first, the form/genre or the content? Does the content shape the genre or the other way around?

Reiff mentions how a student of hers studied case briefs as a genre and among other things, came to the conclusion that, "Even the rigid structure of the format [suggests] the community's emphasis on logic and order, which are two esteemed values of the profession." What does your writing/your favorite writing/the writing we have our students read suggest our community (English students) value most?

QQC 7/26/17

1. Reiff states that “a genre approach to teaching writing is careful not to treat genres as static forms or systems of classification. Rather, students learn how to recognize genres as rhetorical responses to and reflections of the situations in which they are used; furthermore, students learn how to use genres to intervene in situations.” I am confused by how this is not a system of classification and, if not a totally static form, a malleable form often with rigid components. Perhaps I am just confused, but could someone explain how these are different? Related to that, I feel that the question is also how much can we evaluate writing based on the situation? As Reiff seems to value the situation much more than the writing itself.

2. What Yancey says about portfolios being a display of growth interests me. I feel like it should show growth, but also perhaps that it should show off the best of what you’ve got. So I have to ask: should portfolios for students be based on growth or by skill? Not that the two are mutually exclusive, but I feel like there may be different understandings of the purpose of the portfolio and wanted to ask, which do you value more?

QQC5 No.2

Reiff states "one criticism leveled against a genre approach to literacy teaching is that it focuses on analysis and critique of genres, stopping short of having writers use genres to exact change." I think this kind of thing is true, but I also see it as fundamental because it empowers students to be able to deconstruct the media they encounter regardless of how clever its presentation--a kind of defense of sorts. What I noticed today was that even though students were using genre as a means for some kind of advocacy, they didn't exactly have a strong grasp of the different components of their projects within their genre presentation. I believe they were relying on comfortability. Have others noticed this kind of trend in students?

How can we repurpose the analysis of genre in order to empower students away from their reservations about abstract thinking? How can we eliminate the word "weird" from our students' vocabulary?

QQC 7/27/17

1. With regards to our discussion from Tuesday on genre, what do you think of Devitt’s statement: “Genres construct and respond to situation; they are actions” (578)? Does this idea of a genre as an action conflict with the fact that it is a kind of tool to guide writing? Do you think framing genre in this way could be useful in class or might it confuse your students?

2. While I’m still iffy on the idea of using a portfolio in my own classroom, a smaller portion of Yancey’s piece is a reference to the benefit of providing a specific audience to students (112-3). This always benefited my own writing because it helped me push my work: whether I was instructed to write as if to explain to a high schooler, if I was trying to get into a conference, or if we were doing a public reading of our own work. I suppose even presenting a project would broaden my audience. ENC 2135 already seems designed to encourage students to think of a broader audience. Are there any ways you intend to utilize in your own class to put students in the mindset of directing their work at more than just their teacher and maybe a few classmates?

QQC Week 5 2

1. Reiff talks about making genre related and how that is how students get interested in it. Do you think that genres is the easiest concept for students to because it brings everything together that they been doing all semester or is it because of this relatability factor?

2. Maybe it was just me, but it seemed that Devitt was criticizing form and content as it pertains to genre, choosing to favor the rhetorical situation. I understand his stance on it, and agree but isn't form and content needed for the rhetorical situation to be identifiable? I get that Devitt talks about audience changing and defining genre by isn't that in response to form and content? I don't know, maybe I overlooked something or just confused. :) Clarification would be great as well if my question is irrelevant.

QQC 7/26

1. Yancey's article enumerates the benefits of using portfolios in the classroom. Do you plan on using portfolios in your courses? If so, do you see yourself using a working portfolio, completed portfolio, or both? How do you plan on evaluating them?

2. Wysocki's article explores means of evaluating the visual properties of a text. I was especially interested in the passages that discuss typeface because I find that I judge my writing less harshly in fonts I find aesthetically pleasing. Do any of you have the same experience? If so, please include an anecdote.

QQC - Emily Scott

1. In teaching what a Rhetorical Situation is to your students, would you have your students read Devitt's article? Why or why not. Also, would you accompany Devitt's article with Bitzer's article on the rhetorical situation or do you think Devitt's article is enough?

2. Yancey points out that portfolio grading gives the teacher and the student the benefit of looking at the student's work as a whole rather than fragmented pieces. Are there any ways you all can think of that would also allow the teacher and student to view the student's work from the semester as a whole while using paper-by-paper grading? Or is this advantage limited to portfolio grading?

- Emily

7/27 QQ

Yancey's conclusion is that portfolio assessment serves all involved, that "to assert the view of writing and writers put forward by the portfolio practitioners represented in this volume" is to benefit all involved. Do you think this is true? Do you think it privileges one participant over another?

In Reiff's article he writes, "Student's critical awareness of how genres work-their understanding of how rhetorical features are connected to social actions- enables them to more effectively critique and resist genres by creating alternatives." After my internship this morning, the instructor said to me that one thing he sees students struggling with the most is this transfer of the knowing of how a genre works to how to alter it. We thought maybe this has to do with the intertextuality of transfer and the potential lack of varied texts for that student to draw on in the intertextual sense. Thoughts? How do we facilitate this transfer?

 

QQC 7.27.17

      1. Devitt’s article came at a good time for me, because I have been getting increasingly confused about what we would consider forms and what we would consider genres. Theoretically speaking, I could make a distinction between both, but when it comes to giving examples of forms v. genres, I am at a loss. Devitt claims that forms “trace but do not constitute genre” (575). In the discourse I have been hearing throughout my time here thus far, blogs, movies, websites, and other categories all seem to be counted as genres (especially in the discussion of the multi-genre project). But is a blog a genre or a form? How do you think about these terms, and how would you differentiate them for your students?

      2. Reiff gives us as instructors a call to action at the end of her piece, to think about how to situate ourselves within the institutional frameworks and the genres in which we write as a response to these frameworks. People have already mentioned some during discussion in the past, but what are some alternatives to the ‘prototypical’ syllabus and other course documents that we could develop? And why might these alternatives be more productive for our students and for our relationships with them? 

QQC 7/27

My two questions are connected to the readings and discussion from Tuesday as well as the readings for Thursday and hopefully serve to begin sharing some pedagogical ideas with each other.

·      Reiff’s genre approach article presents ideas for students to analyze texts within their desired major to cultivate conversations regarding the rhetorical strategies among texts in the area. I thought this would be extremely valuable to help connect students to the writing process as it extends outside of the course. How might this look from a practical standpoint and what activities, or projects might be valuable for this type of genre approach?

·      Wysocki’s article touches on the topic discussed in Tuesday’s class that everything is multi-modal underlying the concept that even a traditional paper and ink composition is multimodal because we are working within a space using specific tools. She presents the idea of textual analysis to draw conclusions regarding intended rhetorical situation. How might this be used to help students understand the importance of looking beyond the visual layout of text with regards to validity of information? For example, the textual features might imply a valid source when in fact it is not.

(Sorry for the babbling!)

QQC 7/27

1. In Reiff's essay, she says that to critique and resist genres we must create an alternative and then goes on to say that students should be encourage to critique sites of intervention. What does Reiff mean by "intervention" as it is used in this context? What is the student intervening in through genre analysis?

2. We've talked a bit about portfolio vs paper-by-paper grading and we see this argument brought up again in Yancey's piece. What value do you see in both of these methods and what method, or combination of, do you envision yourself using in the classroom? Also, do you agree with Yancey that process becomes lost when we evaluate?

QQC 7/25

Q1: In the excerpts from Naming What We Know, multiple writers attempt to define genre. Several theorists mentioned the importance of recurrence. Carolyn Miller’s argument, for example, “holds that genres are habitual responses to recurring socially bounded situations” (29). Further, both genre and meaning making arise from “the interplay of texts” (45), whether at the local, linguistic level (the interplay of the sign), or within the broader traditions of rhetorical context (as with genre). My question concerns how we might apply this knowledge to music—or, rather, what differentiates “music” from sound. Eschewing the Merriam-Webster, how would you consider music in relation to these concepts, recurrence and textual interplay? Does either quality suffice alone to make a sound music? Are both needed?

Q2: Shipka’s “heads-up” statements signal students to assess “specific goals they aimed to achieve with their work” (287). These self-assessments appear to be reflexive and open to alteration. What are the benefits of administering such or similarly organic self-assessments in the writing class? The challenges?