"Doing school" vs. the writing classroom

I think that Durst’s discussion of critical literacy (“emphasizes certain broad dispositions of mind, including reflectiveness about self, about one’s wider society, and about one’s roles in that society”) is really important to us as writing teachers, primarily (at this point) because it helps us define what exactly it is that we are teaching (37).

The obstacle to implementing this pedagogical strategy? “Doing school” (a phrase I’m borrowing from Ray Craig).

I am still guilty of “doing school,” especially when I think about my grades. In the great realm of things, they are essentially meaningless, but within the confines of academic success, I have a difficult time ignoring them. Even though I try to ignore them, grades show up in the back of my mind as an indicator that the (dis)approval of authority has been bestowed upon me. This in mind, I’m almost certain the concept of grades is high up on the list for incoming freshmen. Therefore, I am desperate to learn ways of encouraging my students to look beyond their grades and “doing school,” and instead, put their energy and, dare I say it, enthusiasm towards learning, critical literacy and reflectiveness.

Durst touches on the concept of “doing school” by explaining that within the biographical essays he is discussing, “the first and – for many students – only stated consideration centers on their anticipated performance in the course” (51). These students have the perception that a successful class performance includes, but is not limited to, a mastery of mechanics and the four C’s: correctness, clarity, conciseness, and creativity. While I do think that each of these items have a place in the writing classroom, they should by no means be the larger focus of the course. Instead, Durst places his emphasis on a curriculum that teaches “writing at a global level”, an extended and complicated composing process, multiple views of a text, and the goal of social transformation through critical questions (60-61). These goals are somewhat mirrored in the College Writing I & II handbooks we received last week, and it is comforting to know that students (the ones who actually read the handbook) will be aware of the kind of learning that will take place in the writing classroom.

According to the student handbook, the College Writing courses are an integral part of the Liberal Education Requirements, which are intended to:

Prepare students to live in today’s complex, global society. They broaden intellectual perspectives, foster ethical and humanitarian values, and prepare students for responsible citizenship and productive careers. Through this learning experience students develop the intellectual flexibility they need to adapt to an ever-changing world. (31)

I feel somewhat intimidated by this statement of purpose knowing that, if Durst is correct, most of my students want to learn mechanics and the four C’s. Obviously, my course, College Writing I, is not intended to completely fulfill this statement of purpose; instead, it is in combination with the other Liberal Education Requirements that the statement is intended to play out. Likewise, the goals of College Writing I (student handbook) seem less daunting:

Tier I is designed to be an introduction to college writing and is premised on an understanding of writing as a rhetorical process based upon the goal of communicating effectively with specific audiences. Tier I also includes an introduction to writing and information technologies that informs the effective use of written communication in academic and professional settings. (32)

Sorry about the block quotes, but I do think these two are important to consider when thinking about the goals of the writing classroom. My questions, after today’s readings, are these: How do I encourage students to go beyond “doing school,” and instead help them to focus on the importance of goals such as critical literacy? How do I implement the above goal of the Tier I writing course with respect to the LER statement of purpose?