During the turbulent years of the 1960's and 1970's, Mina Shaughnessy was on the front lines as a "powerful advocate for basic writers when open admissions challenged educators to look beyond traditional teaching methods in order to meet the needs of under-prepared students" (COMP-biblio, 265). Shaughnessy studied "more than 4,000 student essays" (271) which provided the research for her textbook Errors and Expectations: A Guide for the Teacher of Basic Writing published in 1977. This text is still highly regarded as a tool which allows the composition teacher to empower students and help them gain control over language (271). In recognition of her contributions to the field of composition, the Mina P. Shaughnessy Prize was established by the MLA Executive Council.
Lester Faigley author of "Competing Theories of Process: A Critique and a Proposal," an assigned reading for this week, was a recipient of the MLA Mina P. Shaughnessy Prize for his textbook, Fragments of Rationality (1992). While Shaughnessy's work was in response to open admissions policy and the needs of underprepared students, Faigley examines the legacy of this response as he discusses three pedagogies that emerged from those turbulent decades. The "Expressive View," the "Cognitive View," and the "Social View" are pedigogies carried into the twenty-first century by composition instructors who struggle with their students to produce "good writing." Faigley argues there are ideological questions attached to each of these approaches which cannot be ignored (682).
Certainly the under prepared students Shaughnessy encountered at CUNY were under educated women, minorities, and recent immigrants. Yet, Kenneth Bruffee's article from last week's readings, "Collaborative Learning and the 'Conversation of Mankind,'" argues that during
those turbulent decades there was a "pressing educational need" (547) that became apparent, not only for the under educated, but for the better prepared student entering college. "For cultural reasons we may not yet fully understand, all these students seemed to have difficulty adapting to the traditional or 'normal' conventions of the college classroom (547). Bruffee states it was an attempt to meet the needs of both sets of students that led to collaborative learning in the classroom.
Shall we point a finger at John Dewey's Progressive Education as one cultural link to a generation of failed writers? There are those who would say that Progressive Education's emphasis on "interesting and freeing the child, and it's cavalier treatment of the study of classic literature and classical languages" (handout) certainly contributed to the demise of learning in the teacher-centered classrooms of yester-year. Of course, simplistic connections never serve complex problems. Yet, that is not to say that the link doesn't exist.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Marilyn,
ReplyDeleteYou bring up an interesting point. Maybe we went too far with progressive education to the point where it set up a generation of writers to fail. According to one online source I read, it said that one of the mainstays of a progressive classroom is that students learn by discovery. I wonder, though, if writing is something that should not be learned by discovery, but through structured and tried-and-true methods. I agree that learning by discovery can be highly valuable, but maybe not for every subject.
Dawn's child goes to PSAS, which is a progressive school. I would be interested to hear how writing is taught at PSAS.
Yes, Marilyn, I think we can point a finger at Dewey for part, but certainly not all, of the problem. Much finger-pointing can be done. In one of my posts, I quoted a Boston Globe article about the increasing numbers of students who must take "remedial" college comp courses, because so many students are unprepared for college writing. Could it be that because we proudly tout teaching process writing that we are neglecting the product? Say what we may about the glories of process writing, our colleges and universities still expect an organized product.
ReplyDeleteYes, Keli, I have learned that finger pointing and the blame game aren't included in critical thinking. I was intrigued by Bruffee's claim that there were cultural reasons we may never fully understand that somehow lead to a demise in producing the "organized product" you refer to in your blog. If someone hasn't done a doctoral dissertation on a possible connection, I think it would be an exciting hypothsis to explore.
ReplyDeleteYou know I do not know that Dewey was so wrong, as much as public education did not take into account cultural and societal issues, in determining how each child's needs were being met. Montessori education and other learning models certainly have been centered on discovery. So have most gifted classes. Mike Rose suggests we set up a discovery process for students based on self expression and examination of ethnographical issues that they have experienced as a way to teach critical inquiry. Sounds good to me.
ReplyDelete