Considering "Ground Rules"

Prior to reading the Durst chapter, I had invested little thought in the concept of ground rules. I cannot say that it's something in which I'd invested any conscious thought. Curiously, it seems as though on some level I have always been aware of it. (My own tacit theory of writing, perhaps?) In reviewing the handbooks for freshman composition courses, and reconsidering Durst, I began truly thinking about the idea of ground rules, and and the problems that can arise from ground rules being less than explicit in a classroom situation.

The Durst article resonated with me on this level because as a student, I think I have always been aware, on some level, of academic ground rules--such as taking notes in class, extending respect to all others in the class, attentiveness etc. I had not, however, considered the need for ground rules from the perspective of a teacher, or the problems that can arise as a result of students' lack of response to or awareness of them. I have seen it time and again from the perspective of student, and although I have never possessed a conscious awareness of it, I have certainly reacted to it. I have felt irritated in classroom situations in which students consistently disrupt class. I guess I could simplify justify that reaction by attributing it to an aversion to blatant acts of disrespect, and while this is true on some level, it now seems too "pat" after reading Durst. I see it now as not only the obvious aversion to disrespectful conduct, but also as a result of my tacit understanding of ground rules for classroom conduct, which is something I have transported with me in the form of "cultural capital."

Being able to identify infractions of what I have considered appropriate classroom conduct is one thing. This is where the difficulty has begun for me. I have difficulty in considering how to navigate this same landscape from the instructor's position. This is where the Durst reading has naturally led me. In my experiences as a student, particularly when I was younger, I have always (somewhat instinctively) not only looked to the instructor, but expected that he or should would regulate the kind of behavior that can detract from my learning experience, such as the behavior Durst notes on the parts Felicity, Cindy, Shawn and Chloe (79). Clearly as a student, my expectations of the instructor seemed fair, but in considering this kind of situation from the point of view of the instructor, it becomes much more complex. I tried to consider how I would react to this as their teacher, and I agreed with Nan's initial course of action in privately discussing the matter with the students, but when it continues after this point, what does one do? This simply can't be boiled down to "bad manners," or something of that nature. These students came from an educational background that clearly did not espouse even what seemed to me the most basic of ground rules. This has left me wondering how, as an instructor, am I going to negotiate the differences in cultural capital that each student demonstrates? It is somewhat discouraging, yet not surprising, that Nan's students did not respond (or only in a very cursory way) to her requests that the students show more respect in the classroom. So it looks like, at this point, the reading has raised more questions than answers for me. (Not that this is a bad thing, it is generally a good thing on some level.)

After this point, we have moved on to looking through the handbooks for composition courses here at Kent. My main point in relating the two of these topics is that I think requiring the purchase and use of these documents takes an important step toward addressing the reservations I have, particularly since reading Durst. Since it has been quite some time since I was in undergrad myself, I did not have the guidance of such a document in the beginning. Although many ground rules, like those I addressed above, may not be discussed in the handbook overtly, they are addressed in a more tacit way. I am thinking about things like "tardies" and how tardy students can disrupt the classroom may seem "old hat" to us, or even to freshman students who have been endowed with more cultural capital in their educational experiences, this concept may not be so old and worn out to others who may not have functioned in an environment that put emphasis upon even coming to class at all, much less being punctual. The fact that these handbooks are required for all students, I think, is beneficial because it serves to inform every new student of classroom expectations, and while it seems redundant to some, it could serve to prevent inappropriate (especially unconsciously inappropriate) behavior in others. The handbooks not only make explicit what is expected of students in their writing courses, but also in a more tacit way, addresses what is expected throughout the university. In a way I viewed it is almost as an "equalizing" tool as far as cultural capital goes. Although I doubt that it is the panacea for all educational challenges in the adjustment between high school and college, I do think that on some level the handbooks bring these issues to the forefront for students, and serves to begin them thinking about it, and possibly responding. I am also not blindly optimistic enough to believe that this "fixes" all inequalities in the amount of cultural capital different students bring with them, but I think it marks a relatively equal starting point for all.

I was also interested in how the handbook for instructors also addresses these kinds of things and emphasizes how important it is for instructors to be straightforward with students from the beginning with respect to what is expected of them.By making this clear from the beginning, from issues of attendance and punctuality all the way to issues of plagiarism,even those who might not carry a conscious "theory of being a student" with them in the form of cultural capital will bridge that gap more easily and the sooner they do that, the more beneficial and comfortable their educational experience will be. By using these in conjunction, one on the part of instructors, and one on the part of students, the problem of cultural capital is being broached, which is the first step in resolution.