Teaching Journal #2

Overall, in the second week of classes I hoped to increase discussion as well as the quality of the summaries and syntheses I was receiving from my class.

Wednesday we covered Margaret Kantz’s “How to Teach Students to Use Texts Persuasively”. I wanted them to understand how reading rhetorically and finding an original argument within a conversation could really contribute to the betterment of a research paper.

First, to get them questioning the construct of “facts,” I split them into groups and had them discuss Questions for Discussion and Journaling #1, as well as the prewriting exercise that asks them to define “fact,” “claim,” “opinion,” and “argument”. After they shared their initial thoughts about facts and what they learned after reading Kantz’s article, I launched into a whole class discussion on the rest of Kantz’s points.

I asked them if they related to Shirley at all, and the answer was a resounding yes. I asked them, considering Kantz’s view on “facts” would they change the way they write papers? If facts aren’t the end-all, be-all of a paper that we thought they were, how does that change the way we write? They responded that they needed to question the facts. This worked wonderfully as I transitioned into reading rhetorically and Kinneavy’s triangle.

I asked if anyone could explain Kinneavy’s triangle to me. When that failed, I asked them to name me the three components. I drew the triangle on the board and proceeded to explain, erasing a chalk line to represent a “gap” in the rhetorical situation that could be remedied by a thoughtful, original research paper. The visual example seemed to help the students. I then asked them to define Kantz’s article in terms of rhetorical situation. Where does her gap occur? This seemed to confuse them a bit, so after we talked about it I then referred them to the example Kantz refers to about Churchill’s writing.

I asked the students what constructs Kantz tries to overcome in the article, and was pleased by their answers of “facts” and “the use of creativity in academic writing”.

With the time that remained we looked at an example summary and synthesis of Kantz. I asked them to tell me what the author did well and what they thought was missing. They said it was OK, even though the summary at least was missing several elements. After I brought this to their attention they said they understood, but I think I need to do a workshop on how to write an effective summary.

I think Wednesday went well. I covered everything I needed to cover and discussion was a little more forthcoming. I think I will keep utilizing group discussion as a bridge for whole class discussion and perhaps write on the board more to help visual learners.

Friday was in the computer lab in the library. As we went through the research databases powerpoint, I found I had to make more of an effort to maintain classroom control. I patrolled the room as I made sure they found every database and knew how to use the functions I was explaining.

After the guided tour of the databases, I let them research on their own as I answered individual questions. I was surprised and pleased at the amount of questions I received. I think I was able to talk to nearly every student about his or her topic, and was able to help troubleshoot potential problems. It was nice to be able to talk to the students on an individual level and hear their genuine thoughts, interests, and concerns about their topics.

One thing Friday taught me is the value of individual consultation. It makes me look forward to individual conferences, and makes me hope that more students will utilize my office hours.