Blog Prompt #2: Supporting My Students' Writing

1)      The Three Forms of Writing

      The BC English Language Arts (ELA) Grade 11 Integrated Resource Package (IRP) outlines three main forms of writing. The first form is Personal Texts, which elaborate on ideas and information to experiment, express self, make connections, reflect and respond, and remember and recall. The second is Information Texts, which express ideas and information to explore and respond, record and describe, analyse and explain, speculate and consider, argue and persuade, and engage. The third form is Imaginary Texts, which develop ideas and information to strengthen connections and insights, explore and adapt literary forms and techniques, experiment with increasingly sophisticated language and style, and engage and entertain.

The Five Stages of Writing 

According to Graves (1983), there are five stages in the writing process. First there is prewriting, which is a critical step when writing. Prewriting helps writers explore ideas, through the use of brainstorming, mindmapping, and other strategies. Once prewriting is completed, the next step is drafting. While drafting, writers jot ideas down quickly and in rough form while continuing to explore and flesh out ideas. A completed piece of writing should go through several drafts. The third step is revision. After completing a first draft, the writer deletes, adds, or moves material around to increase logic and flow; structure and cohesion are also addressed. The next step in the writing process is editing, which involves a final polishing of the piece of writing (grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc.). The last step is presenting and publishing. According to Graves (1983), while this step is frequently omitted from writing in school, it is an essential step in the process; it enables students to learn to write for a variety of audiences and gives them a chance to get recognition apart from the teacher.

Three Aspects of an Effective Writing Program

There are various aspects that make up an effective writing program. First, it’s important not to favour one form of writing over another. In one case study by Casey and Hemenway (2001), the authors followed a young female student, named Page, from grade 3 to grade 12, interviewing her every few years to get a sense of her attitudes and aptitudes of writing. They found that, although Page enjoyed writing in the primary years, upon reaching high school she no longer was confident of or content with her writing. In her primary years, Page was permitted to engage in mainly what the BC ELA IRP defines as “expressive” and “poetic” writing (28). In other words, writing in which she was allowed to express her feelings, values, and attitudes, and fiction. Once Page was in secondary school, the focus shifted to essay – or “transactional” (28) writing. Casey and Hemenway found that this focus on one type of writing drained Page’s pleasure and personal satisfaction she once received from her writing (74). It is important to utilize all three genres of writing in an effective writing program to prevent students from losing their personal connection to their writing; in the ideal classroom, “both teacher and students would understand that all expository prose involves creativity and expressive writing” (Casey and Hemenway, p. 74, 2001).

Another important aspect of an effective writing program is including many opportunities for conferencing and feedback between student and teacher, as well as among peers. The BC ELA IRP states that to assist students in their writing, teachers can “create opportunities for teacher-student and peer conferences around specific moments in the writing process,” allowing students to tell and transform their knowledge (30). Additionally, Casey and Hemenway point out that the ideal writing classroom would include “talk about writing, ... [and] opportunities for feedback” (74). Central to an effective writing program, then, is allowing for and supporting a space where interactions among students, as well as the teacher, can take place.

A third aspect of an effective writing program is allowing adequate time to draft, revise, edit, and reflect. The BC ELA IRP recommends that teachers “include moments for critical reflection on both the process and structural aspects of writing and also its content” (30). Reflection is an important part of writing, as it allows students to make a piece of writing personal and meaningful. Casey and Hemenway note that a personal connection between the student and their writing is essential to promoting positive writing experiences and programs (74). Without sufficient time and space to revise and reflect, students’ writing becomes empty and meaningless.

My Own View of a Balanced and Supportive Writing Program

One factor that will be important to me in developing a supportive and balanced writing program is providing plenty of feedback throughout the writing process, not just about the finished product. I will be sure to provide clear and succinct criteria about what my expectations will be, yet allow for enough freedom and choice for the student not to feel stifled. I have found that throughout my education, from secondary to post-secondary institutions, adequate direction at the beginning of the writing process was the exception rather than the norm. Additionally, I only once had a peer conference (in class) about a piece of writing, and that was in my third year of university. In secondary school I never had feedback from a teacher prior to handing in my work nor had any support in the actual writing process. I believe there needs to be a constant back and forth – from one peer to another and between teacher and student – in any effective writing program.

Much like Page from Casey and Hemenway’s article, as I moved forward in my secondary education, teachers focused increasingly on writing essays and less on writing nonfiction. Also like Page, as teachers stressed expository writing (the five paragraph essay) my interest in and connection to my writing waned. It seems to me that while teachers try to drill “how to write an essay” into our minds they forget perhaps the most important component of writing: creativity and imagination. Without this personal connection, I never really cared about what I wrote – aside from what grade the teacher gave me. This type of writing program is bankrupt; it produces passionless, bored writers who are busy thinking about what the teacher wants rather than what they think and feel. As a teacher I think it is important to not focus solely on essays and keep some expressive writing in my courses. I believe it is fundamental for me to encourage freedom and creativity throughout the writing process.

Blog Prompt #1: The BC ELA IRP and Me

Three main challenges/opportunities as an ELA teacher in contemporary classrooms.

One the main challenges I see for myself as an English Language Arts (ELA) teacher is having realistic notions of what it means to be an English teacher. Ursula A. Kelly (2000) writes about the expectations and intentions of beginning (student) ELA teachers. As Kelly points out, the choice to teach secondary English is “about an intimate, often passionate, relationship with English,” and this relationship can often get in the way of real, involved learning in the classroom (pp. 80-81). Kelly suggests that beginning teachers should invest this often idealized, self-embodied energy about English into the realities of the classroom (81). According to Kelly, beginning teachers usually have clear positions or perspectives about English that fall into four broad categories: “communication skills and rhetorical/function discourses, cultural heritage and aesthetic/cultural discourses, personal growth and ethical/progressive discourses, and social and cultural criticism and political/critical discourses” (83). As Kelly rightly points out, these discourses can (and will) lead to contradictions, and it is my job as a beginning ELA teacher to embrace these contradictions and use them to inform and expand my notions of English, what it means to teach English, and what English might mean to my students. This task will be both a challenge and an opportunity: maintaining my passion for ELA while putting my students’ interests and learning first and not becoming pessimistic about the realism, verses the romanticism, of English.

Another challenge I see revolves around what Kelly calls “splitting off.” Splitting off refers to a kind of dualism when beginning teachers ignore their personal teaching philosophy and (perhaps only temporarily) adopt the “normative wave” of their mentor teacher or their school (Kelly, p. 85). I agree that this splitting off is problematic: it is a “denial of agency and a refusal of the very human capacity to effect change where change is necessary” (85). The challenge for me as a beginning teacher will be to uphold my own ideas, understanding, and skills, while respecting the norms of my school and the advice of my mentor teacher. I also see this as an opportunity to develop new skills as I negotiate between my personal educational philosophy and the established system of norms within which I will be operating.

A third challenge I see for myself as an ELA teacher is finding ways to connect with students who are accustomed to primarily communicating via technology (cell phones, social networking), and perhaps at the same time trying to integrate different forms of technology into the classroom. In class we viewed two videos on YouTube: “A Vision of Students Today” and “What its Like Being a Highschooler.” These videos explored the (sometimes startling) realities of the average contemporary student. For me, what was very apparent in these videos was the extent to which the life of the average Canadian adolescent has changed, even from when I was a secondary student. One of the most apparent ways the student’s life has changed is in the forms of communication commonly used. This is important, because for me English is largely about communication – I will be trying to teach students how to become better communicators (in a variety of modes, including reading, viewing, speaking, listening, and representing) through the use of different forms of communication (textbooks, novels, essays, films, etc.). As Dr. Nahachewsky pointed out in his PowerPoint “Teaching English,” the conception of “text” are ever-expanding in form and content along with the “evolving notions of what it means to be literate in a rapidly changing and multi-modal world” (Slide 5). The challenge for me will be to engage my students (even though I might not always understand them) with texts they will find stimulating and relevant to their current lives.

The positive/negative aspects of the BC ELA IRP in supporting you as a beginning English teacher.

For me, the greatest positive aspect of the BC ELA IRP is its openness. Essentially, the Prescribed Learning Outcomes (PLOs) for secondary English are not connected to specific texts. For example, one of the PLOs in the ELA 10 IRP is “read, both collaboratively and independently, to comprehend a variety of literary texts” (ELA 11 IRP, p. 50). The IRP does not specify which texts to read, only that texts must include a variety of vague criteria. In other words, I can use whatever texts I deem appropriate to enable students to meet the PLOs. This leaves me with a great deal of freedom and room to explore - I can draw upon my personal and/or professional opinion, or whatever other sources are available to me (textbooks, novels, plays, films, internet sources, etc.). I can also tailor the texts I use to the needs of my students – what will they find interesting? What will engage them? What will they find relevant? What will help them meet the PLOs? Essentially it is up to me to how I will enable my students to meet the PLOs, which is thrilling.

At the same time, I also see this as a negative aspect of the BC ELA IRP. I imagine it will be very difficult coming up with the appropriate texts to teach specific (or multiple) PLOs. This lack of structure is not evident in most IRPs, such as Social Studies, Math, and the Sciences. In these subjects, the PLOs are much more specific and are linked to specific pieces of information or knowledge that the students are required to know and understand. In English, there essentially is no required content – the content is simply the means by which I will teach the skills and knowledge outlined in the PLOs. Conversely, in most subject areas the content is the PLO. As Dr. Nahachewsky pointed out in his PowerPoint on teaching ELA, English is a “’content-less’ subject discipline” (Slide 3).  For me, this lack of apparent content is both intimidating and exciting.