Sometimes I get one too many juniors or senior in my upper-division humanities courses that simply cannot write.
This very post was prompted by the sudden realization that I am frittering my life away telling some rube "hey, 'outside' is one word" or " 'Which is their main goal.' is not a sentence, connect it to the previous one with a comma" or "are you telling me that you have gone through life thinking 'facets' was spelled 'fascists'?". It is a horrible parade of grammatical awfulness.
How did these guys get this far? Why is it up to *me* to correct this stuff? Why didn't their grade school teachers thump this into them? Why did the university let them in?
And it's not just some spelling issues that I'm being elitist or nitpicky about! It's that these problems are a mere reflection of their inability to organize thoughts or argue effectively or do any of the things that one should do in an essay. I want to pull my hair out. I want to scream at the heavens. Why, why am I reading this infantile garbage that should, by all rights, get one laughed out of the fifth grade? The most superficial analyses! The most banal comparisons! The most incompetent 'theses', if such are ever to be found!
Juniors, huh? I had a graduate student who currently works as a teacher in a high school leave the following message on the door to my office (for everybody to see): "I must of forgot to hand in the essay."
ReplyDeleteI still wriggle with shame at the thought that some people might have seen this talented missive on my door.
If where I live is any indication, "reading" consists of taking multiple-choice comprehension tests on fake "grade-level" material (i.e., canned pseudo-literature written with a specific vocabulary, not novels and stuff). This is true all the way through AP. They don't read *or* write, so they can't write about what they (can't) read. In other words, never having been exposed to organized thoughts, a decent vocabulary, narrative, or any of the other things that come with reading actual books, they can't think.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I am reading chapter books to my four-year-old, who follows them just fine, after which we chat about them. I think if I can just expose her to enough decent sentences, maybe there's hope for her.
Frog and Toad - this is the problem in a nutshell. They don't read, so they can't write. They may well be sensitive and nuanced critics of videos and TV. They may even be good at shooting and editing videos (though I suspect most of them aren't.) So long as they don't have to write their thoughts down, or sit and read extended text (longer than a web page interspersed with interactive crap) for any period of time over 10 minutes.
ReplyDeleteMA said: "They don't read, so they can't write. They may well be sensitive and nuanced critics of videos and TV. They may even be good at shooting and editing videos (though I suspect most of them aren't.)"
ReplyDeleteYou're right. The ones who can't write, don't read, and they suck at ALL analysis And their editing usually sucks too because they cannot analyze, criticize, re-arrange, or re-order images (whether still or moving).
That story about different skills based on their digital nativeness is a lie.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNOW you know why "It's just a blog" is NO excuse for not knowing the difference between "your" and "you're," and not saying so, loud and clear, when a student doesn't, at ANY time! NOW you know why Orwell's essay, "Politics and the English language" is now more valuable than it's ever been. If our words are foolish, our thoughts cannot possibly be wise.
ReplyDeleteI get juniors in my upper-level physics classes who can barely do math, of any kind, at any level of proficiency. It's scary: I do NOT want these dipsydoodles working as engineers. They will be a danger to the public, me included, if they do!
And no, they are not sensitive or nuanced critics of anything. They do not shoot or produce their own videos: they don't have the imagination, initiative, or even the skills to do it, even if they're closely supervised. Every one of my engineering students has this big, honkin' programmable calculator, and not a ONE of them knows how to program the stupid thing!
What they do use them for is to multiply numbers by ten, because that's the only way they know how to do it. That, and as magic talismans: many of them seem to think sincerely that the calculator gives them power, only because of its presence. It's magical thinking.
In his 1994 book, "The Demon-Haunted World," Carl Sagan wrote this:
"Science is more than a body of knowledge; it’s a way of thinking. I have a foreboding of an America in my children’s or grandchildren’s time—when the United States is a service and information economy; when nearly all the key manufacturing industries have slipped away to other countries; when awesome technological powers are in the hands of a very few, and no one representing the public interest can even grasp the issues; when the people have lost the ability to set their own agendas or knowledgeably question those in authority; when, clutching our crystals and consulting our horoscopes, our critical faculties in decline, unable to distinguish between what feels good and what’s true, we slide, almost without noticing, back into superstition and darkness..."
Welcome to the future, baby, you had a hand in making it. They got this far because they were allowed to do so. The fault lies not in our stars: it lies in OURSELVES.
This is one of my greatest laments. I actually left teaching in my discipline to teach composition classes for precisely this reason. I thought "If I could just understand what they learn as freshmen, I could help them more when they come to my class!"
ReplyDeletePerversely, the writing program at my school relies on a "top-down" approach...teach them the macro-level mechanics of argument, and they will "naturally" figure out the mundane bits like grammar.
Hold the phone, my friends. Students coming out of my comp classes knew about the passive voice. They knew about the importance of using the right word (not the "write" word or the "righteous" word). They knew how to make an argument, sure, but they also wrote with what I ecstatically dubbed "style and flair." Some of them...well...they had less style and flair, but they were capable of writing reasonable prose.
When I came back to my discipline to teach, I gave my students handouts from my days in the composition program. I did not spend class time actively teaching them composition, but I did say "Hey, let's be honest. If you are a better writer, your grade is going to improve. Competent writing makes the difference between a B and a B+. Even if it's not conscious, my brain is registering your writing ability. Help yourself out and work on your prose."
Sometimes if there is a consistent problem (such as word choice) in a class's writing, I'll take five minutes to talk about it.
Otherwise, it's up to them.
Oh...and yes...it's most assuredly related to a lack of reading as youngsters.
I often wonder why, since composition is clearly the most important, applicable thing we teach in the English department, it is consistently handed to the least experienced instructors (grad students, for example). Especially since (in my experience) most English majors get into English for the literature or creative writing, not composition and rhetoric. Aren't we doing the students a disservice by not putting the most experienced, most interested in comp/rhet professors on the job instead of grad students and adjuncts?
ReplyDeleteI very much appreciate that, at my university, tenured faculty frequently teach composition, but at my Master's institution, they had to be dragged into it kicking and screaming--if they didn't refuse outright.
Tonight, I'll see a bunch of new grad students in my class and, in two weeks, will assess how well they've done on their initial writing assignment. Oh FSM! All I can hope is that the current crop will be better than the past.
ReplyDeleteIf needed, I already have my stuff ready to discuss your/you're/yore, their/there/they're, apostrophes, etc.
And, they'll find out (tonight) that I'm Death Personified when it comes to plagiarism (thanks to a supportive administration).
Snarky: I suspect that it's because teaching freshman comp is soul-destroying work. You can either let fresh young people take it, or have an army of zombie silverbacks.
ReplyDeleteI long ago concluded that the root of the problem is a lifelong lack of reading.
ReplyDeleteWhat I now wonder about is, if they aren't reading, what are they doing? How are they filling 16 or more waking hours, 365 days a year, for two decades? Even if one fritters away all of his or her time on the internet (as most do these days), one is still constantly reading. Now, blogs and news sites are hardly known for consistently offering sophisticated prose, but they do generally at least use complete sentences and appropriate grammar. Unless you spend your days lifting hay on a farm all day, what else is there to do but read in one form or another? Stare at the walls?
Oh for the love of freaking Roget and Webster ... THANK YOU!
ReplyDeleteThis past weekend I was in nearly catatonic despair, utterly spent after losing count of how many times I had to insert the following feedback into GRADUATE student work:
> Apostrophe "s" indicates possession NOT plurality;
> If it is not a beginning a sentence, a proper name or title, do not capitalize words;
> Avoiding stilted third person perspective does NOT mean you write as if you are telling a story ("Now I will discuss the importance of basket weaving ...");
and
> When discussing a published article we all have, you do not need to cut-and-paste/block quote entire paragraphs to identify the topic of your discussion!
I quote (again) the philosopher, Maitre d'Bueller, "I weep for the future."
I, too, think Frog and Toad nailed it: the key problem is that they don't read (and read interesting, sophisticated stuff -- even stuff they don't completely understand, a useful brain-stretching exercise -- from an early age). Those of us who teach composition can try to create explicit versions of the experiences they should have been having, more or less unconsciously, all along -- e.g. holding up everything from whole essays to individual sentences as models, and having them follow suit -- but there's a limit to what we can accomplish in a few months.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, teaching writing is difficult, and should be the province of experienced teachers who are given reasonable loads in recognition of the difficulty of the task, and are well-paid for their effort and expertise -- heck, I started the sentence with "should," so I can dream. In the meantime, working with the prevailing realities (students who haven't read much for the first 20 years of their lives, too many students/courses/sections, low pay), those of us charged with formally teaching "composition" (and, by default, reading) will keep trying to nudge them incrementally forward, and, yes, writing all the things everybody has listed above in the margins of their papers; it's not that we don't tell them; they just don't pay attention to us, either.
I wish I could say this is a modern problem, but I've seen it throughout my academic career. When I was in doctoral studies, I remember being shocked by some of my classmates' extremely poor writing skills. I thought that if someone made it that far, surely he or she would have mastered basic sentence structure, spelling, and punctuation rules. When I spoke to my department chairperson, she all but patted me on the head and said, "Oh soon-to-be EnglishDoc, you must recognize that not everyone has your superior writing abilities." Hello? This is doctoral coursework for future (and in some cases present) English teachers!
ReplyDeleteAs a Full Prof at an R1, I would gladly teach a section of freshman comp a year, but they won't let me unless it's an overload, and also because it would take away a job from a grad student. As recompense, I am really tough on my students' writing at the grad level, and at the undergrad level if the class is small enough that I can offer opportunities to revise. But it is mostly too little, too late.
ReplyDeleteThey seem not to ever have been taught grammar, whereas I, a Gen-X-er, had to diagram sentences in 6th-8th grade. They seem never to have been taught argumentation, whereas I had to write position papers supported by evidence from 4th grade on. They have not learned note-taking or summarizing techniques, which I remember taking up the bulk of 3rd-5th grade. They seem never to have been taught basic research protocols in the humanitie and social sciences, while at the age of 11 I wrote my first 15-page term paper using original historical sources (on microfiche!) and secondary criticism. They don't know how to revise or edit anything, which started in 3rd grade as I remember it. The gap between their high school education and mine seems about 7 grades.
As to what they are doing instead of reading: TV, texting, video gaming, and social networking, none of which involve reading or writing long complicated sentences. They don't even write e-mail! Without any casual practice reading and writing, how can it ever get better?!
The only good news is that a friend of mine teaches middle school English in a good public district, and has revised her teaching in response to our conversations about what college students need to be able to do (not, as I told her, relate their personal feelings to topical young adult novels, though I am happy she teaches novels). But she is not fettered by No Child Left Behind because her school is high-performing and supported by private funds.
If there were time and dollars to get K-12 teachers and college professors into the same conversations, oh what a world it could be. In the meantime, I read to my kid: on the toilet, at breakfast, waiting for the car pool, before bedtime. Hope you do too!
Depends on the student. If a student is fresh off the boat and humbly says, "Me no talk English so good," then I will likely smile and reply, "You're doing a hell of a lot better than you were last month."
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI adopted this rule from some forgotten workshop:
ReplyDelete"Papers containing more than four careless errors in grammar, spelling, or APA format will not be marked."
They take me seriously after the first lab.
You know, I hate to tell you all this, but these kids ARE learning grammar and composition skills in elementary school, and high school, and first year courses. They're just not paying attention. The problem is not in what is taught or even how it's taught. The problem is, in large part, the fact the students are almost never failed in grade and high school anymore. We wouldn't want to hurt their self-esteem, now would we?
ReplyDeleteWhen I was doing my MA in English, my proffies constantly complimented me on the clarity of my prose. I was astonished. Surely my classmates couldn't have reached this level without being able to write well. I was wrong.
@issyvoo
ReplyDeleteI don't know where you're from, but my wife and I met while teaching HS in one of them there big American cities, oh, around the turn of the century.
She, in fact, was an English teacher.
At least in this system she was told -- in no uncertain terms -- she was NOT allowed to teach grammar. At least not in any sort of programmatic, progressive manner.
Students, it was assumed, would glean any grammatical skill from reading feedback from returned papers. I watched my wife pore over reams of illiteracy, providing copious corrections.
Students generally looked at the score and, so long as it was passing (and I mean JUST BARELY), they crumpled it up and threw it away.
This was a system that pre-NCLB already had standardized "pass this or you don't graduate" testing. The English test, given its content, was the longest to correct, so they often brought in teachers from other disciplines to correct the 1/3 of the test which was straightforward vocabulary. Meanwhile, the English teachers would huddle together trying to make sense of the essay questions.
I was there as they were given express instructions that so long as any part of the content made reference to the question, the student HAD to pass that question. No points off for spelling, grammar, structural flaws.
We are reaping what we've sown.
@Overeducted: Thank you for a strategy I'll be using from now on.
ReplyDelete@Everyone: In the earliest literature known, cuneiform tablets from Mesopotamia some 4,500 years ago, adults ranted about the low standards of the slacker generation coming up. One could use this as evidence that civilization has seen 4,500 years of decline, and that our students ARE the worst ever. On the other hand, one could argue that it is the human condition to rant about the next generation.
When I was a grad student and an assistant editor of a professional journal, I was appalled by the carelessness (misuse of punctuation, inconsistency of references) in manuscripts by well-established scholars decades older than me. The editor found my shock amusing and naive: further evidence that what we're seeing with our students is not necessarily new.
@Frog and Toad -- I suppose you're correct about how students are spending their time. As someone who has chosen, for reasons of peace of mind, not to own a tv, cell phone, or videogame thingie, I often forget the size of the technological gap between myself and my students.
ReplyDeleteIn addition to not reading, I think a significant part of the problem is that students do their writing work at the last minute to a much greater extent than was common in previous generations. The lure of 'easy' pleasure from other sources is extremely strong, and many have little experience with sustained, uninterrupted, quiet work, I think.
I teach down in the lower pits -- high school. And even my demographic (wealthy, cultured, educated) is having trouble making an argument. They don't understand the nuance of language, or the precision required to make themselves understood in the way they wish to be understood.
ReplyDeleteThey don't believe in rules; grammar is a suggestion. Who cares if you don't spell it correctly? Everybody knows what you're trying to say. Look at the creative spelling for marketing!
It's tough down here, too. The best of us are trying -- trying to get them to read, to write, to use their language like the tool it is.
But to most of these commenters I say, yes. You are right. Your reasons are valid.
"This isn't English class!"
ReplyDeleteHow many non-English dept. profs have heard that one?
Must be nice to compartmentalize human knowledge and just pretend literacy is a superfluous skill.
Maybe we all should forget how to do math and calculate their grades wrong. Oh, wait...the flakes already think we do that. Because we are obviously just as dumb as they are.