For this week’s
blog post, I’ve reviewed the extended analysis of Jessica Smith, and I love the
approach she had towards The George Washington University’s First Year Writing
Program.
The George
Washington University has a topic-driven program that enables students to
explore a specific topic for their own desires. It gives students this “focus”
and “flexibility” that Jessica has mentioned, which also gives professors the
opportunity to stretch their own abilities as well. An act of conversation
(instead of instructing answers) seems to present this freeing atmosphere that
both professor and student can obtain, and I really enjoy this concept. It
definitely doesn’t separate creativity from critical thinking, giving knowledge
the ability to grow and to develop.
With this high
focus on topic-driven, students are free to explore through a wide range of
sources. They’re given the opportunity to connect to topics they feel most
passionate about and are able to explore through a huge multitude of research
so they are able to communicate topics confidently. It allows creativity to
stretch and participate in these endeavors when the students are allowed to
pick topics that fit within their comfort zones.
Along with
strengthening their research abilities, students should hone in on their
grammar skills. To be able to persuade effectively, students must be able to
communicate with absolute clarity. I think FYC should stress on basic grammar
skills because all students come from different backgrounds and not all students
learn the same. Some will suffer by not learning grammar or by learning grammar
the wrong way. Here in composition students should return to the roots of
writing and get the training they need to communicate their passions
successfully.
Creative writing
allows identity and exploration. It should be a tool used in composition
because it allows freedom in the academic space. Writing can be a challenge and
exploratory writing and creative writing can construct an outlet that lets
students, well, create and experiment. These “experimental” writings propel
emotion, innovation, and voice in the students’ chosen fields.
The George
Washington University approaches First Year Writing in a way that I feel I
would enjoy in the art of teaching. It sounds to have a relaxing approach to
writing for both students and professors, and actually indicates how writing
should be viewed—something that can be applied within any field. Writing here
seems to have this “user-friendly” vibe that allows students to explore writing
on their own terms.
Rachel, I just wanted to let you know that I have reviewed the plagiarism podcast you made with Mary, Jill, and Colleen. It starts out as a review of the presentation, while bringing up the aspects of plagiarism that I learned from the whole presentation. Fair warning: my response boils down to what I thought of it.
ReplyDeletehttp://krdwardb5.blogspot.com/2015/10/critique-on-extended-analysis-by-rachel.html
The approach that you made in responding to Jessica's article was also interesting. I liked how you just explained your own thoughts on the university that Jessica looked at, and the points that you made on how First Year Writing and creative writing should be looked at were well-supported too.
Good post, Rachel. Like you say, FYC involves a variety of things. Yes, critical thinking. Yes, grammar and style. Yes, personal voice and authentic, writing with conviction. In some ways, every program is experimental. Every good program, that is. We should constantly reflect on what we're doing and why. Right?
ReplyDelete