Genre, what is it good for?
As an instructor on multiple campuses for a variety of universities and colleges, I am given certain freedoms and restrictions when it comes to the FYC curriculum and assignments. This is at times enlightening, exciting, challenging, and oh. so. frustrating.
Nonetheless, the lack of personal and professional leeway when it comes to book selection, room priority, and pedagogical framework has created a knowledge of the pros and cons within certain approaches to teaching composition. This only adds to my professional bag-o-tricks that allows me, hopefully, to reach and connect with as many learners as possible in meaningful and successful ways.
One pedagogical approach that the majority of my community colleges demand is the Genre approach; a good survey of the different pedagogical approaches can be found in Tate et al. book A Guide to Composition Pedagogies. While teaching modes of writing, Narrative, Persuasive, Definition, and such, has allowed me, as the teacher, to solidify my own knowledge in these foundational modes of writing, it has also highlighted to me what this approach can and cannot do in preparing Freshman writers for the writing demands that will follow in their college and professional futures.
Yes, the explicit teaching of modes provide an opportunity to discuss, compare and contrast, rhetorical situations and the efficacy of each mode in reaching certain audiences, delivering specific intents, and achieving well-defined purposes. One evening community college class that I taught was full of nursing students with a smattering of liberal arts/ undeclared students. In order to test the Genre pedagogy in its ability to prepare students for the projected career’s writing, I created a curriculum that asked the students to research, through primary methods, the possible writing within that career. Samples of said writing with rhetorical analysis of each sample/ mode was required as a final cumulative project. Considering much of the nurses’ writing is formulaic and largely consisting of data, the interest level of the class was high, lowering the usually high absentee and attrition rate of these classes. Also, the analysis of the modes was insightful and accurate. Grounding the Genre study within the intended career did not necessarily support or satisfy all the course requirements; however, I would argue those students may be more sound in fundamental knowledge of the purpose, intended audience, and word choice than the students who were taught my standard Genre Pedagogy curriculum.
My thought is this:
As in all teaching situations, time is limited; the knowledge to be conveyed within that time period is not. Each pedagogical approach has its pros and cons, but which most effectively prepares our FYC students for success in future writing (assuming that this is even the goal of the course) ? Is it teaching concepts like argumentation and critical thinking through discussion and drawing arguments webs on the board? Is it research design and methods? How about thesis statements, topic sentences, organizational patterns, and essay structure? Does/ Can a creatively structured, ruthlessly edited, and expertly timed syllabus, driven by Genre pedagogical practices, achieve adequate student preparation?
Some Interesting Quotes to Consider:
“Their methods emphasize complementary goals: to give students access to and control of particular genres; to help students learn how to learn any unfamiliar genres they might encounter, whatever the medium and context; to help students see the cultural and ideological nature of genres in order to make their own choices and gain critical understanding” (Devitt 147).
“Sunny Hyon captures the essential rationale for teaching particular genres, especially as defined by Systemic Functional Linguistics [...]:’[Teach] students the formal, stages qualities of genres so that they can recognize these features in the texts that they read and use tem in the texts that they write’” (Devitt 147).
“That rationale has been a long-standing one for teachers in many contexts who teach particular genres (though too often teaching only formal conventions), including new media and multimodal genres: you will need to write this research paper/ argument/ lab report/ web page; I will teach it to you and then you can write one on your own” (Devitt 148).
Similar to Wardle’s discussions, “teaching the rules for playing particular genre games often leads to methods referred to as ‘explicit teaching’, wherein the features and rules of the genre are taught directly” (Devitt 148).
Speaking of sample papers- “Because it uses genre samples for strategic analysis rather than models for mastery, this pedagogy teaches metacognition reflection and explicitly discourages formulaic writing” (Devitt 153).
I see that my previous comment was not saved! Here it is again:
ReplyDeleteWhat is the purpose of FYC? What should be taught and what should be excluded? The debate about what should be taught in FYC is ongoing and very ideological as well as political.
I believe that one semester (the length of most college composition courses) is too short for students to learn to write well in any particular genre. Also, there are too many competing interests and academic/career trajectories in the class to choose a specific genre. What FYC courses CAN do, however, is to raise students' awareness that different genres exist, that writers write with a specific audience in mind, and that good writing involves revisions. Although we cannot teach every genre's specific conventions, we can help students get exposure to several different genres by providing them with mentor texts and texts written for different audiences and for different purposes. By comparing the texts, the students will gain awareness that different genres exist and that each genre has distinct features. This will prepare them for learning to write in different genres, across disciplines, and for different audiences, and purposes.
Mellissa, I'm curious what those students came up with when they investigated the writing typical of the nursing field. What samples did they bring back or identify as valuable for analysis? How much support did you give them to lead them towards identifying rhetorical context and the features of different genres? Sounds like an interesting, and worthwhile, project!
ReplyDeleteKris,
DeleteIf I recall correctly, a lot of the writing was forms: order forms for companies, order forms for specific rooms (OR or Recovery), patient intake and release forms, patient charts. We spoke a lot about the notations nurses put into the patient charts and the differences between doctor expectations as to what should and how it should be written. It allowed for a lot of discussion on what is "viable information" and audience expectation (different doctors wanting different information and updates, the same order form but for different companies needed different information). What they came to realize was that although "narrative" as taught in comp class can be shifted and applied to the needs of careers you would automatically think. Nursing students found that narrative, specifically, was helpful in patient charts, for example. I just loved the discussions the research brought about; of course, this was in a class where the students who did the work and committed to it gleaned the most from it. The others who chose to rebel against the self-driven course failed miserably and may have done better in a more structured, due date driven, and less exploratory type comp class. Which, of course, makes me reflect on my choices as the instructor....
Mellissa,
ReplyDeleteI have taught a similar project that engages genre analysis some year ago, in a course on Professional Writing. Asking students to collect and analyze samples of genres in their professional field can be helpful in a number of way (as outlined by Devitt). Genre analysis can help them to recognize specific formal features and content conventions of a particular genre, but it can also help them to connect those features with a particular rhetorical situation - to help them see WHY and HOW the situation prompts particular features, and conventions. I think doing those two things can be very powerful. I have found it difficult to go the extra step Devitt describe to get them thinking about broader ideological and epistemological concerns inherent in genre uptake/production/adaption. That's where it gets really interesting though.
I have not found much use in "the modes" though - because , for me, they don't represent genuine writing.