• View
• Edit
• History
• Print

Seminar in Composition Theory

English 476/596: Composition Theory
Winter 2006
Instructor: Dr. Elizabeth Wardle

COURSE SYLLABUS

This course provides an introduction to the theories and issues that inform the discipline commonly known as Rhetoric and Composition, which I define as including writing-across-the-curriculum and professional communication. The course is intended to be a survey of movements and topics important to the discipline of Composition. Many—but not all—of these relate to writing instruction. Course topics include:

• History of Rhetoric & Composition;
• Writers, Writing, and Revision;
• Reading;
• Genre theory;
• Writing-across-the-curriculum;
• Matters of identity, ideology, and language.
  

This course is appropriate for anyone who expects to teach writing and/or who is interested in the study of writing.

REQUIRED TEXTS

Clark, Irene. Concepts in Composition: Theory and Practice in the Teaching of Writing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2003.
Villanueva, Victor, ed. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory: A Reader, 2nd Ed. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English, 2003.

NOTE: If you join the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) you can subscribe to the journals College English and College Composition and Communication, and also receive a discount (up to 30%) on books published by NCTE (including the Villanueva book) when you purchase from their website (or through their regular mailings). Students can join for $20 and pay half the list price for the journals. If you join at the student rate, you can list me as the “sponsoring faculty.” The main website is http://www.ncte.org

The following required outside readings are available via the library’s e-reserve

• Aristotle, “Excerpts from Book I, Rhetoric. On E-Reserve
• Berkenkotter, Carol and Donald Murray. (1983). “Decisions and revisions: The planning strategies of a publishing writer” and “Response of a laboratory rat—or, being protocoled.” College Composition and Communication: 34.2: 156–172.
• Berkenkotter, Carol and Thomas N. Huckin. (1993). “Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective.” Written Communication 10.4: 475–509.
• Berkenkotter, Carol; Thomas N. Huckin, and John Ackerman. (1988). “Conventions, conversations and the writer: Case study of a student in a rhetoric Ph.D. program.” Research in the Teaching of English 22.1: 9–44.
• Bizzell, Patricia. (1986) “Foundationalism and anti-foundationalism in composition studies.” Pre/Text 7.1–2: 37–56.
• Brodkey, Linda. “Making a Federal Case out of Difference: The Politics of Pedagogy, Publicity, and Postponement.” In J. Clifford and J. Schilb, eds. Writing Theory and Critical Literacy. MLA, 1994. 236–261.
• Carter, Michael. (1990). “The idea of expertise: An exploration of cognitive and social dimensions of writing.” College Composition and Communication 41.3: 265–286.
• Clark, Beverly Lyon and Sonja Wiedenhaupt. (1992). “On blocking and unblocking Sonja: A case study in two voices.” College Composition and Communication 43.1: 55–74.
• Emig, Janet A. The Composing Processes Of Twelfth Graders (NCTE research report No. 13) 1971 Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English [ERIC Document Reproduction Service, ED 058 205]
• Foss, Sonja, Karen Foss, and Robert Trapp. “Perspectives on the Study of Rhetoric.” Tim Peeples, ed. Professional Writing and Rhetoric: Readings from the Field. Longman, 2003.
• Fulkerson, Richard. (1990). “Composition Theory in the Eighties: Axiological Consensus and Paradigmatic Diversity.” College Composition and Communication 41.4: 409–429
• ---. “Composition at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century.” CCC 56.4 (2005): 654–87.
• ---. “Four Philosophies of Composition.” CCC 30.4 (1979): 343–348.
• George, Ann. “Critical Pedagogy: Dreaming of Democracy.” In Tate, Rupiper, & Schick A Guide to Composition Pedagogies. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. 92–112.
• Haas, Christina and Linda Flower (1988). “Rhetorical reading strategies and the construction of meaning.” College Composition and Communication 39.2: 167–184.
• Haas, Christina. (1994). “Learning to read biology: One student’s rhetorical development in college.” Written Communication 11.1, 43–84
• Hansen, Kristine “Second Thoughts on ‘Diversity, Ideology, and Teaching Writing’” in Against the Grain: A Volume in Honor of Maxine Hairston, edited by David Jolliffe, Michael Keene, Mary Trachsel, and Ralph Voss. Hampton Press, 2002.
• Kirsch, Gesa (1991).Writing up and down the social ladder: A study of experienced writers composing for contrasting audiences Research in the Teaching of English 25.1 33–53
• McCarthy, Lucille Parkinson. “A Stranger in Strange Lands: A College Student Writing Across the Curriculum.” In Landmark Essays on Writing Across the Curriculum. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press.
• Pare, Anthony. “Genre and Identity: Individuals, Institutions, and Ideology.” In Richard Coe, et al, eds. The Rhetoric and Ideology of Genre: Strategies for Stability and Change. Hampton Press, 2002. 57–71.
• Shaughnessy, Mina P. Errors and Expectations: A Guide for the Teacher of Basic Writing. 1977 New York: Oxford University Press.
• Shor, Ira. (1999). “What is critical literacy?” In Shor, Ira; Caroline Parr (Eds.), Critical literacy in action: Writing words, changing worlds. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1–30
• Swales, John. “Chapter 2: The Concept of Discourse Community.” In Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Setttings. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
• Trimbur, John; Robert G. Wood; Ron Struckland; William H. Thelin; William J. Rouster; Toni Mester. (1993). Responses to Maxine Hairston, “Diversity, Ideology, and Teaching Writing” College Composition and Communication 44.2. 248–255.
• Wardle, Elizabeth. “Chapter 3: Macro Layer Analysis of FYC Motives.” Contradiction, Constraint, and Re-Mediation: An Activity Analysis of FYC Motives. Ames: Iowa State University, 2003.
• ---. “Identity, Authority, and Learning to Write in New Workplaces.” Enculturation 5.2, 2005. http://enculturation.gmu.edu/5_2/wardle.html
• ---. “ ‘Mutt Genres’ and the Goal of FYC: Can We Help Students Write the Genres of the University?” Forthcoming in College Composition and Communication.

WHAT TO EXPECT

• This course will be demanding. Because it is a survey course there is an extensive amount of material to cover, and you are expected to become familiar with all of it. I will rarely cover in lecture the material assigned to you in the reading. Thus, you must complete all of the reading before class in order to understand and participate in the day’s activities. Expect minimal lecture and maximum student discussion and presentation. I value intellectual inquiry and discussion. I expect intellectually engaged students who are responsible for their own learning, who prepare carefully for each class, and who assume responsibility for their accomplishments and shortcomings. If you are confused about readings or ideas, you should (you must) ask questions.
• A note on notes: You may find that class discussion is not the best place for you to take notes; rather, I suggest you take notes *as you read* and then amend those notes after class based on what you learned that day. If you expect to do well on the midterm and final, you must keep up with main ideas, synthesize main points as you go, and thoroughly consider the relationship of new readings to previous readings as we read and discuss them. The best way to do this is through careful writing-to-learn notes. If you just wait and hope everything will come together when you sit down to write the midterm or final, you may find yourself sorely unprepared.
• A note on writing expectations: I expect every piece of writing you turn in to me to be polished, organized, and thoughtful. This is a class about Composition, and I am a Composition teacher. In addition, you are upper level or graduate level students, many of whom will (or already do) teach writing, and many of whom are English or English Education majors. As a result, I expect to see excellent writing from you. Prepare and revise!

ASSIGNMENTS

POLICIES

Grades For all work, a “C” is average and indicates you have acceptably completed all requirements. A grade below “C” indicates you have not met minimum standards. “B” is an honor grade, awarded for work that is thoughtful and well-written. “A” work is excellent and goes beyond what is required.

Attendance Your attendance is mandatory and your success in this course depends on your active engagement. Absences beyond two (the number permitted a seminar course) without serious cause will earn you a zero for participation. If you must be absent, it is your responsibility to find out what you missed from another student.

Late Work I normally do not accept late work for credit. If you are experiencing special circumstances and would like to request an extension, speak with me well in advance of the due date and use all the rhetorical strategies at your disposal to effectively make your case. I reserve the right to accept late work with or without penalty as the circumstances warrant.

Computer Use Save everything. Make it a regular practice to check your disks for viruses and back up your work on a disk, external hard drive, or the university’s network. Computer problems are regular part of life and I expect you to prepare for them rather than use them as an excuse for late work.

DAILY SCHEDULE

UNIT 1: COMPOSITION & RHETORIC: AN OVERVIEW

UNIT 2: EARLY STUDIES IN RHET/COMP

UNIT 3: THINKING ABOUT SOCIAL ASPECTS OF WRITING

UNIT 4: CONSIDERING AUDIENCE

UNIT 5: RECONSIDERING GENRE

UNIT 6: CONSIDERING READING FROM A SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE

UNIT 7: CRITICAL PEDAGOGY

476/596 ASSIGNMENTS

Reading responses (5) (50pts total)
Each student is required to make formal responses to the readings, using the prompts I pose on the syllabus. Each response must be no shorter than 2 typed double-spaced pages. Due dates for each set of responses are detailed on the daily calendar.

Good (i.e., 9–10 point) responses will

• Clearly answer the questions I posed,
• Consider the implications of the readings,
• Synthesize not summarize,
• Consider how the readings relate to what you have read or experienced in this class or elsewhere,
• Talk about how the readings have influenced you or changed your thinking,
• Be clear, organized, and edited.

Keep in mind this is a writing to learn activity. The purpose of requiring you to keep reading responses is to force you to carefully consider what you have read and make connections between the readings. If you are ever in doubt as to what you should or should not do in a reading response, it may help you to keep that purpose in mind. Your learning is my primary consideration here; in order for me to gauge your learning I need to be able to read and understand what you have written. Thus, you should organize your responses and edit to correct spelling and grammar problems.

Class participation (50 points)
To earn your participation points, you must be present, prepared, and an active participant in class. To earn a high participation grade you should come to class having read the material and taken notes on it, you should speak thoughtfully, listen to me and your classmates, and ask questions about material you do not understand. As our class is small, participating in discussion should not be difficult.

Annotated bibliography on a composition-related topic of student’s choice (50 points)
No later than February 16 you must choose a composition/literacy/writing/reading related topic of interest to you. This topic may relate directly or tangentially to what we have read in class, or you may be inspired to research another topic. You must get your topic ok’d by me before beginning. You will then research this topic of your choice, finding 8–10 relevant and timely readings on the topic other than what we read for class. Begin looking for sources by searching the composition database: http://comppile.tamucc.edu/ and by examining the bibliographies of articles that we read.

The annotated bib should include a 1–2 paragraph introduction to the bibliography, orienting readers to its contents, scope, and usefulness. Each entry in the bibliography should include full citation information in correct MLA format with a 1–2 paragraph summary of the source.

The list of potential sources for your annotated bib is due to me by March 2. The final annotated bibliography is due April 4. Students should email classmates a copy of their annotated bibliographies.

Review of the literature (50 points)
Using the material you read for you annotated bib, write a review of the literature. This requires you to synthesize rather than summarize.

To write a review of the literature, imagine yourself having come from a meeting in which a complex debate took place. You want to tell a group of friends about the meeting, and to do so you need to describe the conversation. You won’t strictly talk about just the ideas that got covered. You’ll give a blow-by-blow account, as best you remember, of what points have been made and by whom. When you’re finished, your friends will have a good sense of how the conversation went, and they’ll feel able to jump into the same discussion and make their own points.

Reviews of literature appear, in one form or another, in virtually every academic article, recounting what has already been said in the conversation on the topic so that readers can understand where the writer is starting. They describe what is considered known and unknown about a given issue. They synthesize the arguments that have already taken place. Usually reviews of the literature precede a writer’s own research, creating a space or a “niche” for the current writer to make her argument by demonstrating that no one has made it and why it needs to be made to carry on the conversation.

A lit review logically follows an annotated bib. Where an annotated bib summarizes, however, lit reviews synthesize. Your lit review will be organized by point, not person.

Midterm exam (100 points)
Each student will complete a take-home midterm essay examination in order to demonstrate your ability to synthesize and coherently discuss the material we have covered up to that point. You will have one week to complete the midterm outside of class. No extensions will be given.

Final Exam (100 points)
Each students will complete a take-home midterm essay examination in order to demonstrate your ability to synthesize and coherently discuss the material we have covered the entire semester. You will have approximately one week to complete the final exam. No extensions will be given.