Dean 1

Undergraduate Teaching Assistant Final

Portfolio

Sophie Dean

ENGL388V

Professor Hilliard

9 December 2016
 Dean 2

Table of Contents

Lesson plans 3

Discussion posts 6

Learning log posts 10

Group presentation materials12

Reflective essay16
 Dean 3

Lesson Plans

Lesson Plan One: Effective Peer Review Practice

Learning Outcomes:
Students should be able to demonstrate an understanding of
writing as a process that involves composing, editing, and
revising.
Students should be able to provide constructive feedback on the
writing of their peers keeping the rhetorical appeals in mind.
Materials:
1. Student Sources
2. Chalk board/computer

Instructional Procedures:

Free Write: ask the students to share any previous positive experiences
with peer review such as helpful strategies or methods. (2 minutes)

Ask the students to help make a list of key questions to keep in mind
while peer reviewing while writing or typing them on the board. Expand
on the students responses to touch on the important concepts of peer
review such as focusing on global rather than local errors, and
assessing arguments through rhetorical appeals (10 minutes)

Exit Slip: Name one effective peer review strategy you will keep in
mind for our next in class peer review. (2 minutes)

Method of Assessment:
Students will identify what they learned in the exit slip activity,
and they will also apply the strategies they discussed by participating
in a peer review session the following class, and I will assess them
through my observation of their completed draft and interaction with
classmates. The in-class activity also assesses their knowledge and
comprehension of good peer review practice.

Reflection
The revised Blooms Taxonomy emphasizes the importance of
directly tying in objectives into classroom activities and lesson plans. I
kept this guiding principle in mind when designing this plan through
my activity, which involves the students reflecting on their own
experience with the revision process and peer review practices, which
relate directly to the ENGL101 objective of learning writing as a
process rather than product. The second question I posed to the class
requires the students to recall the rhetorical appeals and apply them to
 Dean 4

their own writing and that of their peers. This lesson plan prepares
them for their peer review session, so the material is relevant and may
help motivate students because they know they will have to apply
what we discuss.

Reflection on Delivery of Lesson Plan 1

Overall, the lesson plan went smoothly in that I was able to discuss all
of the material I had planned to get through. The students were slow to
respond to the beginning questions at first, but eventually became
more engaged with the topic and provided some useful past
experiences with peer review that I was able to expand upon and
connect back to my overarching goals of the presentation, which was
to instill good peer review practices and get students thinking about
larger, global errors to focus on in revision to provide substantial
constructive feedback for their classmates assignments.

Sophie Dean
Lesson Plan Two: Revision Workshop
Learning Outcomes:
Students should be able to demonstrate an understanding of
writing as a process that involves composing, editing, and
revising.
Students should be able to approach their own writing critically
and be able to implement effective revision strategies.
Materials:
3. Student Sources
4. 17 handouts of sample text

Instructional Procedures:

Free Write: 5 minutes

Ask the students to complete a free-write reflecting on their own
revision process.
What kinds of questions are they asking when revising? How do
they respond to and incorporate peer review feedback within
their paper? Do they like to scrap entire paragraphs and start
from scratch, reword sentences, or simply move
sentences/paragraphs around?

Discuss Responses to Free Write: 5 minutes

Ask for students to share what strategies they find most helpful,
and what parts of the revising process are difficult for them.

Group Work: Revising Strategies: 15 minutes

 Dean 5

Introduce revision as a holistic process focusing on global rather

than local errors
Divide students into 4 groups of 4 (1 group will be of 5 because
there are 17 students)
Group 1: Revising for Ideas and Content
o Does the author go into enough detail?
o Is there appropriate evidence presented for their
argument?
Group 2: Organization
o Does the argument flow in a logical order?
o Are there any elements that seem out of place?
o Is their thesis/intro/conclusion/evidence readily identifiable
and clear?
Group 3: Word Choice
o Does the author use appropriate terminology/vocabulary?
o Is a word misleading?
o Is the author conveying an appropriate tone for their
chosen audience through their word choice?
Group 4: Clarity/Concision
o Are the sentences clear and concise? Do they simply get
the point across?
o Are there areas where the author could be briefer and say
more with fewer words?
o Are there areas of the paper that are confusing/unclear?
The groups will examine a piece of student writing (attached is a
sample student essay but this can be substituted for an article of
current student writing/drafts)

Discuss Group Work: 10 minutes

Ask for students to share what they discussed in their groups,
call on each group to present on what strategies and elements
they found successful/not successful in revising and within the
text
Exit Slip: 3 minutes
Ask students to briefly jot down two things they learned about
revision before they leave class.

Method of Assessment:
Students will complete a short exit slip to demonstrate that they have
picked up at least two revision concepts from the lesson. Their
knowledge will also be assessed in the peer review workshops that
follow this lesson, as they will have the opportunity to apply some
revision strategies in constructively responding to the writing of their
peers.
Reflection
 Dean 6

The free write activity serves to encourage students to share their own
experience with writing and the writing process, a concept that bell
hooks champions in her essay Engaged Pedagogy, making the
classroom an open environment that welcomes student experiences to
enrich academic discussion.
Another reading I continue to revisit is the revised Blooms Taxonomy,
which emphasizes the importance of directly tying in objectives into
classroom activities and lesson plans. I kept this guiding principle in
mind when designing this plan through my activity, which involves the
students reflecting on their own experience with the revision process
and practices and applying those skills to the revision of the sample
text I have provided, which relate directly to the ENGL101 objective of
learning writing as a process rather than product.

Reflection on Delivery of Lesson Plan 2:

This was my first lesson plan involving a group activity and
overall I believe it went well. This was also the first time my class had
been exposed to the concept of the free writing exercise, so I made
sure to explain to them what it meant and suggest that they could use
their laptops as well since most do not bring a pen and paper to every
class. The process of dividing the class into different groups could have
run more smoothly, as I had not thought out whether I should explain
what each group is focusing on to the whole class or explain it to each
group individually. Ultimately, I chose to explain each groups focus
individually, but looking back I think it would have been beneficial for
the whole class to hear the specific questions I had aimed at the
different groups. I did not have enough time to introduce or complete
the exit slip activity with the class, but we did have similar writing
workshops on the topic of revision where the teacher referenced points
made in my lesson plan, which the students responded positively to.

Sample Handout of Text for Revising Group Activity:

 Dean 7

Discussion Posts

Week 3 Discussion Post: Writing, Learning, and Teaching

I have heard "good writing comes from good thinking" throughout

almost my entire academic career but I have only now begun to re-
examine its actual meaning. To say that good writing is merely a
product of good thinking portrays writing as a secondary mechanism,
and also suggests that as long as we are good thinkers (a vague and
intimidating command, in my opinion) then writing will come naturally.
Bean's discussion of the French word "brouillon", meaning "to place in
disorder, to scramble" (18) for what we define as a "rough draft"
contradicts the notion that good writing can only stem from good,
neatly ordered thoughts. The word itself requires the chaos and
disorder of the pre-writing thought process to even begin to pin down a
concrete outline or plan for the final written work. In this way, writing is
a mode of learning as Emig explains that writing, "through its inherent
reinforcing cycle involving hand, eye, and brain marks a uniquely
powerful multi-representational mode for learning" (124-5). I agree that
writing is a viable mode of learning and that we as students can arrive
at conclusions and have our own ideas made clearer to us just through
 Dean 8

engaging with writing as a holistic process rather than just a sterile

finished product. There is always something to be revisited, to be
expanded upon, and to be learned from in all stages of the process.

I absolutely think that writing can be taught. I know many students

defensively say they are not "English people" (as I often say that I am
not a math person), and to them I say that ultimately it's not about just
English, or the book they are reading in class that they have to write
about in a paper. It's about effectively communicating their ideas to a
particular audience, a skill that is invaluable in any profession. I feel
that students that feel intimidated or closed off to the writing process
have been taught that there is only one correct way to write, rather
than Murray's vision of the "responsibility of the student to explore his
own world with his own language, to discover his own meaning" (5). I
think that helping students realize that writing should truly be about
finding their own distinct voice rather than "writing for the professor"
will greatly improve their writing in the long run.

Expansion
The topic of writing what a student thinks a professor wants to hear is
one that became relevant at the end of the semester with the revision
assignment in ENGL101. Doug made it very clear in class multiple
times that he would much prefer honesty over the stale repetitions of
the same essay of what students popularly believe a professor is
looking for in a revision. I remain steadfast in my belief that good
writing is not necessarily good thinking, but rather good planning, and
good rewriting. It is in the rewriting and revising that I feel a student
can truly discover what they aim to say and develop a strong voice as
a writer.

Week 8 Discussion: Responding to Student Work

I think there is definitely some tension between a teacher's job to

instruct a certain standard curriculum and what should be the ultimate
goal of most writing classes, which is to allow students to become
better writers and ultimately develop their own voice and style. This is
an issue I come across in the Writing Center as well, sometimes I will
look at a student's paper and have a lot of specific things I personally
would change, but that are not necessarily essential to the overall
meaning and instead decide to focus on the broader issue of getting
across what the student wants to convey rather than stylistic choices
that may be a student's own voice coming through the paper. A line
from the Sommers essay that really struck me discusses the
implications of such broad teacher feedback, saying, this, "uniform
code of demands demonstrates that the teacher holds a license for
 Dean 9

vagueness while the student is commanded to be specific" (153). As a

student, I completely agree that this comes across as a "do as I say not
as I do" scenario, but as a tutor I feel that sometimes giving those
broader tips and more general feedback can be helpful because it can
be easily translated to other assignments later on, or other parts of the
paper, so that the student doesn't view the comments as isolated
incidents but rather as directives to always keep in mind. With that
being said, I think it is always helpful to be as specific as possible in
feedback, so maybe along with those vague comments, I like to include
a series of questions they can focus on answering in regards to their
specific topic which at least gets them thinking about what a change to
their writing might mean in that context.

This goes along with Brookhart's point that good feedback is feedback
that students can actually use. It's not helpful to comment on a
student paper using vague directives that they are not familiar with in
practice, or that utilize concepts that are over their head. Especially as
I've advanced to upper level English classes, I've noticed that the
feedback I receive is much more engaging, as professors will often
write follow-up questions in the margins that prompt me to further my
argument. Comments like those are helpful to me because I feel as if I
am actually a scholar in the discourse whose argument is worth
exploring and fleshing out, rather than simply a teacher telling me to
change a word or two.

Expansion:
Sommers point about the uniform code of demands which
demonstrate the teachers license for vagueness is one that I kept in
the back of my mind ever since this discussion, especially when giving
feedback on student writing. Looking back on this post after other
readings I have completed since then, I am again reminded of hooks
imperative to be an engaged teacher that is not above their students,
to be a teacher that is a living example of the fulfillment that is to be
found in language and the teaching of writing. I paid close attention to
stay away from vague directives and instead focus my suggestions on
the student specifically, which in turn motivates them and provides
comments that are directly applicable and acknowledge the student as
an individual rather than just another student writer in a sea of their
classmates who receive the same feedback.

Week 10 Discussion: The Inclusive Classroom

While we come from completely different circumstances, I feel that I

can identify with Tavaris' story on some small level, particularly in
regards to how he feels in a college classroom. He mentions that in his
 Dean 10

African history class he felt segregated, and that other students's

answers were more 'advanced' than his own. I have definitely felt that
way more than once in my own college classes especially in my
underclassmen years, and I think that isolating feeling of inferiority is
one that a lot of students encounter during the transition to higher
education. As a TA, I think I can help students who feel this way by
validating their answers whenever they do find the courage to speak
up in class, and answer any questions they have in a non-judgemental,
friendly way, reassuring them that it's totally normal to feel a little lost
in this type of academic environment.

The difference between code switching and code meshing is that code
switching has come to represent the mindset that there is one way to
speak formally and a different way to speak at home whereas code
meshing, as Young coins it, is "the new code switching; it's
multidialectism and pluralingualism in one speech act." Young goes on
to say that code meshing is what we all do, every day, as it blends
"dialects, international languages, local idioms, chat-room lingo, and
the rhetorical styles of various ethnic and cultural groups in both
formal and informal speech acts." I think this approach is necessary in
the teaching of writing as it acknowledges that language does not exist
in a vacuum. I doubt there is anyone who can completely limit
themselves to only standard American English while writing because
there are so many highly localized and personal rhetorical strategies
and conventions that we bring to our work unknowingly. Young calls us
to recognize that there is much more that is the same among the
different dialects of English, and to hypocritically recognize the
multiplicity of language yet only teach one version is a form of
discrimination.

Delpit echoes some of Young's claims when she writes that she
"learned that people acquire a new dialect most effectively through
interaction with speakers of that dialect, not through being constantly
corrected." The isolation that speakers of dialects different than the
standard feel in the classroom from the constant corrections enforces
writing as a focus on "skills" rather than the more organic, true to life
nature of "fluency" that Delpit discusses, which is more about "writing
in meaningful contexts." I think this shift in focus will result in more
inclusive classrooms that recognize that there are a variety of
Englishes, and provide an open environment to encourage productive
learning rather than unnecessary alienation and oppression of
students' voices.

Expansion:
 Dean 11

These readings were directly applicable to my time as a UTA in the

classroom. My ENGL101 class also read Youngs essay as part of their
syllabus, and we had an in class discussion on how the students felt
about it. The students were overwhelmingly receptive to Youngs ideas,
so much so that at the end of the semester it was what most of them
agreed they had learned from the course when we asked them what
concepts they were keeping in mind when working on their final
revision assignment. Overall, the module on the inclusive classroom
was an essential part of my development as a UTA as I had the
opportunity to see Youngs praxis in action in my own classroom.

Monthly Learning Logs

Monthly Learning Log 1:

Now that I have a few classes under my belt, I am starting to feel a

little more at ease about being in the classroom as a TA instead of a
student. I always arrive to class earlier than Doug, so there are always
a few minutes where I feel a little awkward just sitting alone in front of
the class (especially the first day, I really didn't know what to expect or
do in that situation) but gradually I've begun asking the students some
small talk questions to get them talking, although that's not always
successful. This is something I've talked about with Doug and he
suggested I think about a little activity such as "Sophie's Writing Tip of
the Day" or something along those lines to build a routine around
those minutes that we are waiting for him to run across campus to our
class. I thought this was a great idea and am still thinking about how to
go about starting it, because I am still trying to decide if I want it to be
an interactive question I pose to the class or maybe just a fun fact
related to writing that will lighten up the sometimes awkward tension
in the classroom.

I've also just started answering my first questions from students, which
is reassuring because now I know they don't just see me as a random
person that sits in front of the room but as an important teaching
resource. The questions have all been minor things about MLA citation
mostly, which is largely the type of questions I get at the Writing
Center as well, especially this time of year as the first 101 assignments
are due.
 Dean 12

Overall, the start of my TA experience has been a lot less scary than I
had imagined it would be, mainly due to the laid back environment
Doug fosters in the classroom, which has really helped relieve some of
my stress of assuming this new teaching position so I am really
grateful for that. The students are not super talkative as of yet, but
hopefully they will be more involved as the class goes on and I can
continue building good relationships with them!

At this early point in the semester, I was still very much getting used to
the physical position of being in front of a classroom. I remember that
knowing what to do with my hands, where to focus my gaze, how to
look at the teacher or the board, were my main concerns at this time
and those factors greatly influenced my confidence in the classroom
for the first few weeks. Now I am only slightly more confident in my
body language at the front of the classroom, but it remains an area
that I still feel self-conscious about and that I feel will only get better
with time, and our class only meets for fifty minutes twice a week (with
a couple weeks/classes off throughout) so that may have been a
factor.

Monthly Learning Log 2:

After a month of classes, I can definitely say I am feeling more

comfortable in my position as a TA. In regards to the issue of getting to
class earlier than my professor that I had brought up last month, I did
end up implementing a couple small activities. Before one class, I had
introduced my students to Zotero, which is a cool browser plug in to
help manage citations. That ended up taking a little longer than the
brief couple minutes that I am alone in front of the class, so that made
me wary to go through the effort of looking up different small writing
related tips and tricks to show them before class if it would ultimately
either be so brief that it doesn't fill up any time, or too long and might
as well be a class activity. So since then I haven't really pursued that
idea, and as the semester has progressed students have had more
questions about assignments and the class in general that eat up the
time before class anyways.

I presented the lesson plan on effective peer review, and the

discussion went well. There were no absurdly long awkward silences
and it seems like students really got a good grasp of it because their
 Dean 13

peer review session the next class was productive and sparked a lot of
conversation about their drafts.

I also feel that I have gotten used to my professor's teaching style,

which is very much student-focused and discussion-based. Most days I
sit beside him and chime in when I can during discussions or help
clarify a comment or question posed to the class. I do feel my students
have become more comfortable emailing me and coming to me with
questions, and the overall vibe of the class has been really relaxed
(although we did just hand back grades for the first assignment, which
has noticeably stressed out a lot of students). I feel that Doug's
philosophy for the class is very much in line with the bell hooks reading
we discussed in that he really cares about the whole student,
something he tells them frequently, and wants our class to be a place
of open discussion where we need to make space to emotionally react
to the materials we read and discuss meaningful current events.

At this time, I had already had some experience talking in front of the
class and presenting my first lesson plan. The lesson plan itself was
relatively short, only about fifteen minutes or so, but I felt that overall
it had gone well. It was mainly focused on discussion questions and did
not have any type of activity or free write associated with it. Now, I
have a longer lesson plan under my belt that actually incorporated a
group activity and I am more at ease with being the sole teacher of the
class than I was for the first lesson plan.

Monthly Learning Log 3:

This past month has been busy with some major 101 assignments due,
such as the argument of inquiry, as well as the mandatory one-on-one
student conferences. We had no classes for the week of conferences,
and since we are a blended learning class we were relying on the
students to use this time wisely to work on the projects they had due.
During my meetings with students, it seemed like almost none of them
had started to concretely think about or work on their Digital Forums,
which is the next due date coming up. Despite this I think the meetings
overall went well, and I had really productive conversations with
several students about their projects. I think those meetings have been
my favorite part of the TA experience, because I really got a chance to
hear the students thought process, and share some of my own
experience with their topics.
 Dean 14

Not many students have been coming to me with questions, and Im

not too sure what to do to encourage them. In my meetings I made
sure to mention that I would look over their drafts and would be happy
to answer any questions but no one has reached out. I know that they
must have questions but perhaps they have been putting off their
assignments with our cancelled class meetings. I also know that they
have been going to Doug, however, and I think it has to do with the
fact that they know he is the one grading their work and they are more
concerned with that aspect of the assignment it seems. Especially as
we approach the due dates of some other larger assignments
approach, I would like to see more student writing and be able to
provide helpful feedback, so I hope that in the coming weeks students
start to seek out my help.

At the time of the final learning log, I was starting to realize that I did
not receive as many student emails or requests to meet as I would
have liked or expected. Looking back, I would have to say I am in a
similar place now, as the semester is essentially over and only a
couple of students ever reached out to me with a question, and none
emailed me drafts to look over or discuss in person. I do still feel that
the conferences were probably the most productive and rewarding
parts of the process, and those conversations with students were
positive experiences overall.

Group Presentation

Group Presentation on Teaching Revision: Lesson Plan

:05 - Freewrite

:025 - Think about grade school and high school, and what you thought
of when asked to revise your work. What did you do? How did your
teachers instruct you to revise?

:025 - Think about now. When you revise your own work what do you
normally do? What revision practices do you teach your students?

:05 - Followup to Freewrite

Anyone care to share what you wrote? How has your view/practice of
revision changed in the years?
 Dean 15

Do you think you need to teach different revision based on the

students themselves or on the work they submitted.

:10 - Activity

We distribute writing samples to groups of students.

Problems will be:

Disorganization (paper example of History of Chocolate)

Wordy/repetitive wording (Ethical relativism paper)

Unclear focus/lacks development of ideas (paper on games for

adults)

Students do NOT need to revise these, they need to be able to tell the
students how to revise it.

Well give you 5 minutes to read these over with a partner, and you
need to come up with a strategy to help the student improve their
paper.

388V students will need to present a verbal exchange with a student

(us)

Talk to us like were the student, how can we make this better?

:40 - Discussion

Now that we see how different problems necessitates different

kinds of revision, reflect on your own revising techniques. Do you
find that sometimes youll take different approaches depending
on the task?

Murray makes a distinction between internal revision and

external revision.

Internal revision is when a writer is figuring out what theyre

trying to say.
 Dean 16

External revision is when a writer knows what they are trying to

say and are revising or editing their work so that it can be
understood by another audience.

Peer review is a big part of some of your (and our) classes. Have
you found the experience isnt very useful for some? What can
you do to counteract that?

Sometimes extensive revision can result in a totally new paper,

do you think that is a good or bad thing? Why?

How should we build in the revision process into the syllabus?

Have you encountered this issue as a TA or in other courses?

How do we distinguish peer revision and personal revision as

separate processes to our students? If they are still feeling lost
when revising what other resources do you guide them to?

Kirby and Liner argue that Modeling is important in teaching

revision how have you or your professor modeled revision in the
classroom?

If they have not, how do you think they can model revision in
their classroom?

Kirby and Liner feel that proofreading is the least important part
of revision, why is that?

Do you think that a paper that has not been proofread but still
has valid arguments can still be considered as A level work?

Global and Local revision

Global revision involves the big picture of your essay (ideas,

purpose, audience, evidence, analysis and organization)

Local revision focuses more on sentence-level revision: changing

words so that a sentence is clearer, correcting grammatical or
spelling errors, etc.

:02 - Exit Ticket

 Dean 17

o What did you learn about revision that you would use in
your own writing? What would you pass along to students?

Group Presentation Reflection

My group collaborated on a Google Doc initially, to generate

discussion questions and possible articles to use for our discussion
board post a week in advance of our presentation. We each chose
different colored ink to type in so that we would know who was
contributing what to the document. Following our submission of the
discussion questions, we met up in person at McKeldin library to
discuss what we wanted to include in our presentation and what
elements we thought were important. We all had agreed that we
wanted to have our presentation focused on the readings and the
different terms and theories presented in them, to ground our
discussion in what we read versus just solely on personal experiences.
We wanted to ensure that the class was truly getting some information
from the readings that they would hopefully remember when they were
in a situation where they could give revision advice to a student, which
is why we chose the sample essays to handout and structured our
discussion as a conversation with a student that had written these
papers and needed some guidance on how to go about revising them.
We did read the discussion board posts before class, and I
personally made it a point to mention one post that I had found
interesting and included it in my portion of the discussion which
focused on how to schedule the revision process into the syllabus. I
think this was useful in that it helped me plan on what points to hit on,
as I knew there was at least one person with thoughts on what I had to
say and could help spur the discussion onwards. I did not go back in to
respond to discussion board posts because I did not think anyone
would go back to read them individually, and thought it would be more
productive to channel my responses into the discussion questions we
had prepared and have that exchange in person, in class rather than
online. Overall, I think the class responses to the discussion board and
the actual in class presentation definitely influenced our presentation
in a positive way, as it gave as a good idea of what people were most
interested about in regards to the revision process and helped us
develop questions that would get the most people participating.
I think our presentation contributed to the course objective of
select, critically evaluate, and apply relevant areas of composition
scholarship and the scholarship of teaching and learning to the
teaching of writing, especially because we were focused on revision
strategies and how to best instruct students on the writing methods we
find most helpful. We also emphasized the authors and theories we had
read in our presentation, which clearly connected the scholarship to
 Dean 18

how we as writing TAs could apply these heuristics into successful

teaching methods that acknowledge revision as an essential part of the
writing process.
In regards to the other student presentations, the one that
stands out to me is the topic of style versus error. I particularly
remember this presentation because I felt that even in the weeks after
it, we as a class kept returning to some of the same points and
concepts that we had discussed that week. It was interesting to hear
other perspectives on the topic of matters of style and error, and I felt
that it was truly an opportunity to apply Vershawn Youngs principles
about inclusive writing pedagogy to the real life situation of grading a
students paper and having to determine whether an element of the
writing is to be deemed a style or error. The classroom discussion
revealed our diverse experiences with this topic, and even some
applicable scenarios from our time as not only TA s, but also as
students who have witnessed grading philosophies that rested on the
premise of the existence of only one impeccable grammar. I found this
presentation engaging, and it was one that I felt we continually
returned to as a class even in the weeks following because of our rich
discussion that day.

Reflective Essay

Throughout the semester, some of the major readings and

conversations that have been most meaningful to me were on the topic
of language diversity, code meshing, and the ethics of grammar.
Vershawn Young's "Should Writers Use They Own English" is an essay
that I find myself continually returning to, as it is not my first time
encountering it in a course syllabus as an English major, which I
believe further solidifies his argument that his own English, his code
meshing method, are viable rhetorical strategies that clearly make an
impact and spur meaningful conversations on the topic of writing
pedagogy. This was a reading that was also an integral part of the
teaching philosophy of the teacher I worked with on ENGL101, and it is
also a text we had the students read and discuss in the classroom. A
message that I found helpful in informing my experiences in the
classroom this semester is Youngs point regarding a descriptive rather
than a prescriptive approach to the teaching of writing. Young defines
this prescriptive and limiting lens as, hegemonyBut we should be
mo flexible, mo acceptin of language diversity, language expansion,
and creative language usage from ourselves and from others both in
 Dean 19

formal and informal settings (112). Youngs argument encouraged me

to see student writing as a development of their own voices as writers,
and as what could be a productive addition to the field of academic
writing instead of just a regurgitated piece of writing with no real
personal connection to the text.
My experience as a UTA provided me with the unique opportunity
to truly be a part of the "other side" of the classroom, where I am
afforded the authority to put the principles I have learned from essays
such as Youngs to work to empower students to use their own
narrative voice in academic writing and beyond. Working with Doug
has shown me that the application of the principles of Young's essay
are truly applicable, as I was able to witness them within our
classroom, where we constantly reminded students of the rhetorical
power and purpose of voice, and provided them with concrete
examples of this strategy being used successfully in real world and
academic contexts.
Another reading I have learned from this semester is bell hooks'
"Engaged Pedagogy," which discusses the necessity of teachers to
create a classroom environment which embraces the whole person, not
just a facet of a student that wishes to gain some rarefied knowledge,
but as a human being with hopes and desires and needs that should be
welcomed in an academic context as well. This was something I had
witnessed in some of my favorite courses in college but not something
I had ever given too much thought or was able to pinpoint why it
affected my experience in such a positive way. I now know, from this
course and my time as a UTA, that classroom discussions can always
stand to benefit from the acknowledgement of students' own paths to
self-actualization, that they need a teacher who is aware of their inner
life and fulfillment, enough to meet the "demand on the part of
students for liberatory education, for pedagogical processes that will
aid them in their own struggle for self-actualization" (hooks 17). I have
learned that to get students motivated and engaged in the classroom,
teachers need to bring their authentic selves to the table and create an
open and honest environment that can spur productive and meaningful
discussions. In the classroom, I made it a point to always ask students
how they were doing in the class, in other classes, in life in general,
before class would begin to signal that I am aware of all of the various
experiences they bring to the class discussion.
From our discussions on grammar and its place in writing
pedagogy, I think the lesson I will take with me is the necessity for a
sensitive reframing of grammar instruction. Our class discussions on
responding to student work and discerning the difference between
style and error have greatly influenced how I approach student writing
within English 101. This class and my position as a UTA have
 Dean 20

heightened my awareness of the power I have as an authority in the

classroom and over how a student learns key writing concepts and
strategies. This is something I have always been aware of, particularly
in my role as a tutor in the Writing Center, but this experience has
solidified the responsibility I feel to students to equip them with the
grammatical tools they may or may not need to succeed outside the
classroom, as well as reinforce the also valid rhetorical choice of
writing in their own English.
Another theme that emerged within my own interest in the
duration of the course was the importance of revision in the teaching
of writing as a process. Both of Donald Murrays articles greatly
influenced my new perspective on how writing should be taught as a
process of self-discovery over a sterile finished product. I also noticed
similarities to hooks Engaged Pedagogy, when, for example, in
Murrays Teaching the Motivating Force of Revision, he writes, If
students are to learn to write then the writing teachers must cross over
from the role of critic to player (59). Both hooks and Murray recognize
the importance of the teacher playing an active, engaged role in the
teaching of writing. I particularly enjoyed Murrays open approach to
the opportunity for discovery in the process of writing and rewriting
The teacher who is experiencing important and surprising discoveries
through language is likely to share and support each students
individual exploration of the world (59). This is an idea that is echoed
in Murrays Teach Writing as a Process Not Product as he states, It is
not the job of the teacher to legislate the students truth. It is the
responsibility of the student to explore his own world with his own
language, to discover his own meaning (5). Perhaps one of the most
important quotes that have guided my teaching choices is Murrays,
The teacher supports but does not direct this expedition to the
students own truth (5). I set out this semester to learn more about
how to teach the often-elusive practice of writing, and I now know that
my role in a students writing is one of support, not pretentious
prescriptivism, and I hope that I have the opportunity in the future to
support more students in their expedition to their own truths through
language.

Works Cited

hooks, bell. Engaged Pedagogy.

 Dean 21

Murray, Donald M. Teach Writing as a Process Not Product. Cross-Talk

in Comp
Theory: A Reader. Edited by Victor Villanueva.
Murray, Donal M. Teaching the Motivating Force of Revision.
Young, Vershawn A. Should Writers Use They Own English.