August 2002 CEW Faculty Seminar Series on Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in Courses Across the Curriculum

1:00-4:00 p.m., Aug. 8, 13, and 15

1 Health & Human Development Bldg., East

Facilitators: Jon Olson, CEW Director (865-6383, jeo3@psu.edu); Keith Gibson, Graduate Writing Center Coordinator, Dept. of English Graduate Student (865-8021, keg173@psu.edu); Sherry Holt, Department of English Staff Assistant (865-9243, slh32@psu.edu)

Purpose: To explore specific issues of writing pedagogy within an interactive faculty group.

Materials: John C. Bean, Engaging Ideas: The Professor’s Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom; David W. Smit, Idea Paper No. 25, “Improving Student Writing”; notebook for containing supplemental handouts, articles, and other materials generated in the seminar. Bring the book and the notebook with you to each session.

Preparation: Prior to each session, think about the questions listed under each topic. Also, try to complete the suggested readings and brief writing assignments (but do attend the session even if you haven’t been able to do the homework).

Before the First Meeting:

1. Identify a course on which you can focus as we discuss writing and teaching.
2. Think of concerns you have about using writing in your course.
3. Read materials sent with welcoming letter prior to meeting: Smit’s “Improving Student Writing” and the topical lists of questions.

I. First Meeting (Aug. 8): HELPING STUDENTS THINK CRITICALLY, LEARN

ACTIVELY, AND WRITE EFFECTIVELY

• What are the connections between thinking, writing, communicating, and learning?
• What are the differences between writing to learn and learning to write?
• What are the features of a writing-intensive course? Of a general education course that uses writing as an active learning element?
• What writing do you do? How much of it do you revise? What is the connection in your writing between discovering and communicating? How much of your writing tries to solve a problem?
• What are we talking about when we say writing is a process? A process of what? Of thinking? Of communicating? Of problem solving?

Homework for Next Meeting (Due Aug. 13):

Reading:

· John Bean, Engaging Ideas, chs. 1 (“Using Writing to Promote Thinking: A Busy Professor’s Guide to the Whole Book.”), 5 (“Formal Writing Assignments”), 6 (“Informal, Exploratory Writing Activities”), and, if you still have time and energy, 13 (“Coaching the Writing Process and Handling the Paper Load”)

· John P. Lowe, “Assessment That Promotes Learning” (in notebook)

Writing:

Share with the group a handout you have prepared that explains a formal writing assignment to your students. This can be an assignment sheet you have used in the past, or it can be a fresh one you just created. Please have your name and course on the sheet.

Purpose: Enable participants to collect innovative writing assignments from across the disciplines; promote discussion that will help participants improve their assignments.

Criteria: Be sure the assignment addresses the following elements (as John Bean suggests on pp. 84-85): task, role and audience, format, expectations about the process to be followed, and criteria for evaluation.

Challenge for “Extra Credit”: See if you can sequence a blend of informal, writing-to-learn activity with the formal writing-to-communicate task, with the informal leading to the formal.

Discussion: Be prepared to discuss (1) what you like about the assignment and (2) how you wish it could be improved. If your handout does not specify some of the assignment elements recommended by Bean, be prepared to explain the omission.

Distribution: If you give me a copy of the handout by noon Monday, Aug.12, via one of the following three options, I will make copies for the group: (1) send it by electronic attachment to jeo3@psu.edu; (2) send it to me by campus mail to 116 Burrowes; (3) hand deliver it to my mailbox in 116 Burrowes. Otherwise, please bring 22 copies yourself to the Aug. 13^th meeting.

II. Second Meeting (Aug. 13): DESIGNING WRITING ASSIGNMENTS

• What needs to be specified in a formal, graded writing assignment?
• What are the differences between graded and nongraded writing assignments? Different purposes? Different processes? Different audiences? Different attitudes on the part of the writer? Different criteria for success?
• If writing isn’t graded, what good is it?
• How can we integrate or sequence nongraded and graded writing?

Homework for Next Meeting (Due Aug. 15):

Reading:

· John Bean, Engaging Ideas, chs.14 (“Writing Comments on Students’ Papers”), 4 (“Dealing with Issues of Grammar and Correctness”), and 15 (“Developing and Applying Grading Criteria”)

· Donald Daiker, “Learning to Praise” (in notebook)

· Dennis Baron, “Why Do Academics Continue to Insist on ‘Proper’ English?” (in notebook)

· Dennis Baron, “When Professors Get A’s and Machines Get F’s” (in notebook)

Writing:

Share with the group a syllabus explanation (written to your students) of how and why you are incorporating writing into your course. In other words, show us how you tell students about the writing they will experience in the course. If you teach a “W” course, explain the writing-intensive component. This can be something you already use, or it can be a fresh explanation you just created.

Purpose: Help participants explain course writing goals clearly to students.

Format: Write this in a form appropriate for your syllabus. It might only be a paragraph. Feel free to copy an appropriate page from an existing syllabus. Please make sure your name and course are written on the page.

Distribution: Bring 22 copies to the Aug. 15^th meeting.

III. Third Meeting (Aug. 15): RESPONDING TO AND EVALUATING STUDENT

WRITING

• What kinds of responses tend to make writers want to keep on writing? What kinds of responses tend to stop writers in their tracks?
• In your own writing, when do you look for response to work in progress? Whom do you ask? What kinds of responses do you receive? Are they useful? Irritating? What part do they play in your writing process? Your writing progress?
• What kinds of responses help students the most? When do students benefit from response? Who should respond to your students’ work in progress? How will students working on graded writing be guided through their writing process? How will they receive useful response in order to revise effectively? What is the role of self-assessment in writing?
• What are the differences between teacher response and peer response? When is one better than the other? Why is it helpful for students to review one another’s writing?
• How can peer review lead to substantial improvement and collaborative learning? How can we help students go beyond superficial responses?
• What are the relative merits of written vs. oral peer reviews?
• What is error in writing? Are some errors more significant than others? How should surface correctness figure into grading?
• When, how, and how much should we mark errors in student writing?
• What do we mean when we talk about “good” writing and “bad” writing? In our own writing? In our students’ writing?
• When and how should we grade writing? What is the purpose of grading? How long should it take?
• What are the differences between and the relationships among responding, evaluating, and grading?
• What do you need to know about English/writing in order to grade student writing?

Summations and Seminar Assessment