Articles for Review

The two articles I chose for review are "Material Realities in the Basic Writing Classroom: Intersections of Discovery for Young Women Reading Persepolis 2" by Susan Bernstein and "The City University of New York and the Shaughnessy Legacy: Today's Scholars Talk Back" by a ton of scholars.
The reasons I chose these articles are pure self-interest. The first article deals with two young women's reactions to reading a graphic novel. The abstract says, "these women.....dealt with struggles against marginality and invisibility in a bureaucratic and unfamiliar environment." Not only does this idea seem universal, not just for women, but basic writers everywhere, it brings in literature to the composition classroom and shows reactions.
Last semester, in English 620, there was a lengthy debate about bringing literature into the comp classroom and my view on the matter suprised me. I'm a literature major; as an undergrad I was a creative writer, so by all accounts I should be for bringing literature into the composition classroom. After reading articles on both sides of the debate, I found I did not favor this action at all. I'm just curious to see how the author of this article did this without letting the class become a full-blown lit class (if she succeeded).
The second article deals with what we have been talking about in 621 and reading in the Representing the Other book. I'm curious to see what other people think about the open enrollment at CUNY and how it affected the basic writing program at that school. Thirty years have passed since the school decided to go with open enrollment and it always seems like time gives better perspective to a situation than the actual moment everything is happening.

Who are basic writers?

I'm not even sure where to start to have an answer for that question.  I think people are basic writers for a myriad of reasons.  Some students were taught poorly, some didn't apply themselves when they were younger, others just don't believe in themselves, or somehow writing has burned them in the past, like a bad relationship they just wanted out of.  Mina Shaughnessy says, "For the (Basic Writing) student, academic writing is a trap, not a way of saying something to someone."  I don't think basic writers have the idea that the language people speak with and the language they write with are the same language. Academic writing is like learning a foreign language to them. Basic writers have a negative connotation attached to academic writing.  In academic writing, the tone and the voice changes, but the basic words remain the same.  

I think there is also an idea that academic writing focuses solely around grammar, spelling, punctuation, surface level things.  Academic writing is focused on the expression of ideas; that's the big picture here.  Basic writers sometimes get so caught up in the little sentence and surface level things, they become frustrated and forget about what they are trying to express in the first place.  They are so busy looking at all the imperfections, they don't see the picture.  An example of this idea is the list of false starts on pages 7 and 8.  By false start 10 the writer is making lots of surface level mistakes and has moved away from the initial point.    

Lastly, and maybe the most important point, basic writers don't control their language, they let their language control them.  Basic writers have either a fear, a hatred, or an ignorance of their language.  They don't know or are unsure how to properly use language, so they avoid it.  

Professor X

After reading "In the Basement of the Ivory Tower", I understand why the professor in question decided to go with a single letter instead of a last name.  His/her opinion about teaching writing did not sit very well with me, or apparently, Mike Rose. 

 The first thing about this essay was the elitist attitude that he/she brought to it.  The overall tone of the essay was just mean, especially how he/she mentions "future police officers" or "future state troopers" every other paragraph.  He/she feels that future police officers or state troopers aren't in need of or capable of writing a paper or analyzing literature.  

Secondly, the writer of this essay has an overall crappy attitude toward teaching.  As a teacher, I have realized that if I go into the classroom thinking that my students will not understand something, I just become frustrated.  He/she says, that "I fail nine out of 15 students".  With any job, if I go in saying that I will fail, or my students will, then generally somebody is failing.  I also understand that students get bored, as the students did in the writer's class.  The students also may be picking up on some of bad attitude of their professor.  

The biggest problem I have with this essay is how Professor X lays all the blame for the student failure on the students.  I'm not saying that students are perfect.  (I've had some slackers and heard some of the lamest excuses ever.)  Professor X seems to sit up on his intellectual throne and look down on his poor peasant students.  That's not right.  

As for the actual writing, Professor X focuses on sentence level problems more than the context of the writing.  In the case of Ms. L's paper, "Sentences broke off in the middle of a line and resumed on the next one, with the first word inappropriately capitalized.  The was some wavering between single-and double-spacing.  She quoted articles, but cited only databases-where were the journals themselves?"  Professor X already knew that Ms. L lacked in computer skills.  I don't think it was a coincidence that most of the problems with Ms. L's paper were with grammar and formatting, both easily fixed if the student is apt with computer programs.  

Mike Rose apparently noticed this too because he says in his response, "writing filled with grammatical error does not preclude engagement with sophisticated intellectual material".  Error happens for various reasons.  More often than not, error happens because the student thinks they are correct or they learned something incorrectly.  There is almost always some sort of pattern to the error.  It is entirely possible to look beyond the surface and sentence level problems and see the content of the text.