[Englecturers] Devon's Take on the NY Times Article

[englecturers at lists.ucr.edu]

Howdy y'all:

I agree with Ben about signing emails to the listserv; given the fractured 
nature of our work, this is perhaps the only plausible way to share ideas, 
concerns, and thoughts around the beer keg. It is nice to know who we are 
talking to, and more importantly, who we are listening to (or reading from as 
the case may be).

As far as the Staples piece, I have mixed feelings about the reliance on timed 
writing tests. Four years ago when I was hired on at UCR, I was placed in the 
writing lab. Never having experienced the Subject A or life at a UC school, I 
was taken aback by the binding importance placed on this exam, both by the 
university (i.e., all of “us”) and by the students.

Any writing test can be used for two purposes: to assess a student’s skills 
and then channel the student into a prescriptive program, or to assess skills 
and use that assessment as a gatekeeper, allowing “proficient students” 
through. At its best, the Subject A (APWE) did both to some extent; hence the 
foreboding it created. Given the new structure of the classes at UCR, I wonder 
if this is still the case. Obviously, the SAT falls into the second category 
even though colleges are free to use the results to facilitate placement 
within a program.

Furthermore, having graded the first round of SAT essay tests on-line, it was 
clear to me that the essay rewarded students who were proficient in literary 
extrapolation and writing compound-complex sentences that used subordination 
effectively. In part, I was amazed by some of the results generated in that 
short of time. However, like any essay test, the greater familiarity with the 
topic, the greater the chances of writing a higher scoring essay. I know few 
of us could write a thoughtful argument about irradiating meat or explaining 
the fundamentals of ballet, or even explaining the issues surrounding NCLB: 
hell, I cannot write a clear essay about the Spanish influence in California 
history even though I am a California native and this is a required study in 
fourth grade. (I skipped the fourth grade for a multitude of reasons). Because 
I signed some 
do-not-share-our-secrets-upon-penalty-of-grading-essays-for-an-eternity-in-the
-coldest-corner-of-hell oath with Pearson (SAT test administrator), I am 
reluctant to share the specific topic or sample essays of the March SAT, but I 
hope you get the idea here.

Also, having taken part in John Briggs study on the weight of timed writing in 
English 1A classes, I was interested in the tenor of the results message. In 
all openness, why should timed writing make up such a large part of academia 
(if it even does?) I understand the need for testing in controlled conditions, 
but as the N. Y. Times essay suggests and then seems to contradict, very 
little essential writing takes place in a spurious manner.

Between 1987 and 2001, I worked as part of a management team for a regional 
shopping mall. During those fourteen years I wrote memos (and later Emails), 
participated in annual budget spreadsheeting, penned employee evaluations and 
wrote accident reports even though my main job was to repair and maintain the 
physical structure of the mall. Each of those types of writing had unique 
demands, very separate from the demands of most college writing. None of them, 
outside of rudimentary, informative internal memos and Emails, required 
spontaneous writing. Many had deadlines that stretched over days or weeks, 
some months. Furthermore, it seems that if businesses were concerned with 
writing on demand as part of the job requirements, they would test applicants 
on this skill in some manner. I know of very few companies that make 
applicants write an opinion essay on some esoteric topic in sixty minutes 
without a computer, dictionary, or Internet access.

Perhaps Staples’ message is a bit obscure; he seems to be suggesting a 
different series of writing topics and demands, a move toward a business style 
of writing being taught in the public schools. I know many of us cringe at 
this thought and start compiling an arsenal of reasons against this approach, 
but I ask why? One common theme I hear from my students at UCR and elsewhere 
is this: “Why can’t we write on things like we did in high school?” Obviously, 
the focus of high school writing and college writing is very divergent; if it 
need be so divergent is a discussion worth having.

Finally (I can almost hear the hooray!), the problem should not be the English 
teachers’ alone. At my other teaching job (St. Elsewhere), students are 
required to pass a writing test to graduate. As part of the grading team for 
that test, I meet with professors from across the disciplines and they always 
seem to lament that their students cannot write very well. One of my first 
questions is what grade the students are receiving in the professor’s class. 
If writing is minimized in other classes, or if the grades attributed to 
writing assignments are de-emphasized, what message does this give to the 
student studying chemistry, business, or engineering?  I know the trendy push 
for WAC (writing across the curriculum) has passed, but maybe now is the time 
for it to be “rethunk.” Collaborative teaching is one method, but there are 
others (insert whatever implication you wish for English 1C here). If we are 
to assume that the basic desire of our students is to gain employment, should 
we bend to that desire at least in part?

Only questions to get the party started. Grab a big red party cup, have a 
drink, eat some chips and let’s groove. I'll try not to step on any feet, but 
I’m a terrible dancer.


Devon Hackelton