Elizabeth Edwards
Washington State University
English Department
Teaching Philosophy
My teaching motto is “lead by example.” Acting in this way, either in the classroom or in other situations, demonstrates my intent to hold both myself and my students accountable for learning in a reciprocal and consistent way. Since I view writing as a creative process and want my students to openly explore the creative elements of writing, I as the instructor design a curriculum that promotes interest and invention in writing, as well as provide a safe and hospitable place for students to explore. After having tutored writing for three years, I developed a heightened awareness of instructor practices that disheartened students – particularly vague assignments coupled with negative comments – that reflected a detached view of writing as product, not exploratory process. Observing writing prompts and students’ reactions to those prompts through a tutor's lens, I concluded that composition curriculum required a certain level of enthusiasm and clear communication in order to increase student buy-in, motivation, and self-esteem. Furthermore, the curricular emphasis of a writing course often trickles down into assignment prompts, grading criteria, and overall relationships with students. Knowing the impact of these intertwined relationships, I strive to lead my students with clarity and enthusiasm, acknowledging them as active participants and stakeholders in the classroom environment.
I recognize my students as participants and stakeholders with the primary intent of leading by example, but also with the secondary intent of helping them develop audience awareness. If I plan to successfully teach my students about audience awareness, then I want to create assignments that reflect an understanding of my students themselves as an audience. In “What I Learned in School,” James W. Corder discusses the pitfall of assigning prompts that hold no significance or value to even the instructor orchestrating the course. As a consequence, “The occasion [to write] contains no immediacy; it offers no genuine need that must be genuinely answered. I mean to suggest that even some of our best assignments…do not elicit a driving need to write” (Corder, 45). The reason that even the “best assignments” lack “immediacy,” I argue, is because they overlook audience. When teaching both English 101: First Year Composition and English 402: Technical Writing, I have attempted to consider my students as a level of audience, along with my audience of supervisors and the curricular goals of Washington State University. I attempt to satisfy the needs of these multifaceted audience by employing themed assignment sequences for English 101 and simulated corporate group projects for English 402. I hope approaching the courses in this way gives students access information that surrounds them daily, while expanding upon rhetorical and argumentative constructs deemed paramount to the learning goals of the university. For instance, in my First Year Composition course, I have chosen music as a theme because it is a topic that I will not only enjoy discussing with my students (thus reinforcing and spreading my enthusiasm), but also will provide a springboard for discussing social issues with rich rhetorical and investigative potential (thus helping me design assignments with genuine intention). In my Technical Writing course, I ask students to construct their own research concepts and projects, and to work with their peers to develop a group product. I support group projects in English 402, because I aim to construct a bridge between the classroom and workplace. By employing these course designs, I hope to create an environment full of “immediacy” and salience to students that will encourage them to invent, write, research, and explore.
By developing a curriculum for which I hold great enthusiasm, I believe that enthusiasm trickles down past the day-to-day instruction and into interpersonal relationships with students as I provide feedback on their writing. If I believe that the topics for writing are valuable, then student effort is also valuable, thus increasing my ability to provide genuine praise for progress. Donald A. Daiker discusses the benefits of positively viewing student work, and claims that “the highly apprehensive writer is one for whom anxiety about writing outweighs the projection of gain from writing” (105); this directly insight reflects many of the students with whom I consulted during tutoring sessions. However, Daiker proposes a remedy for anxiety, which is “by allowing students to experience success with writing. They will experience success, of course, whenever their writing is praised” (106). Success and praise coordinate for two reasons. First, students experience success if I articulate that their writing attempts are valuable and worthwhile. Second, if the writing venture is valuable and worthwhile, then my praise of student progress manifests in a genuine way. Not only does my praise manifest from a genuine place, but also my critique and suggestions follow in a more evolved and constructive way. Praising students leads them by example to show them that writing is about honoring and developing interesting ideas, rather than excavating flaws.
Leading students with praise and honoring their unique ideas ameliorates my students' fears and anxieties, when they participate as audience and stakeholder, and also contributes to an ethic of hospitality in the classroom setting. Corder, in “Argument as Emergence, Rhetoric as Love," promotes the idea that successful argument must create a “commodious” (183) space for the audience to absorb and connect to the topic at hand. Haswell, Haswell, and Blalock further explore issues of classroom decorum through their definition of hospitality. Hospitality “[will] encourage teachers to accept and treat students as arrivants, therefore as unknowns, therefore as equals in dignity, privilege, and value” (716). I, therefore, interpret hospitality as requiring empathy and respect. In return, empathy and respect will ensure a “commodious” environment. Leading with examples of praise (Daiker) acknowledges the sensitive and intimidating position of an "arrivant" who works among strangers and new colleagues, and removes anxiety from an unfamiliar situation. If students are "arrivants," then “[The teacher] will always be a co-sharer with unknown arrivants of an ad-hoc community in which the teacher, as host, offers ease – ease with the unique lives and beliefs of strangers” (Haswell, Haswell, Blalock, 716). Therefore, I as the instructor “offer ease” to students sharing enthusiasm and knowledge with them, but also coach them on how to share their knowledge and enthusiasm with others. My role as “co-sharer” requires that I lead with positivity, enthusiasm, and transparency, because my students will borrow and draw from the resources I provide. My role as “co-sharer” requires that I respect the talents, resources, and backgrounds of my students, so that they perceive my willingness to learn from them. Actively co-sharing and promoting my students’ ideas as valid will help them feel as though their opinions are safe, and will promote an healthy dialogue between students from different ethnic, religious, and socioeconomic backgrounds. As instructor, I hold the position of mediator, and need to model ethical ways for approaching topics, either controversial or not. As mediator and “co-sharer,” I have not and do not instigate controversial dialogue through overly personal or overly prejudiced assignment sequences. If my students instigate controversy, unnecessarily, I intervene in a way that protects the opinions and perspectives of all my students.
I am aware that if I want my students to leave my courses with enthusiasm and increased self-esteem about their writing, research, and critical thinking abilities, then I need to lead them with examples of positivity, collaboration, and transparent guidelines to establish a framework for success. I believe that this is one of the strongest assets that I bring to teaching: my genuine enjoyment for creating ideas and analyzing complex social problems. I sincerely hope that my enthusiasm will move students in a positive direction and improve their overall relationship to writing.
Works Cited
Corder, James W. “Argument as Emergence, Rhetoric as Love.” Rhetorical Review 4 (1985): 16 – 32.
Corder, James W. “What I Learned in School.” On Writing Research: The Braddock Essays. Ed. Lisa Ede. Urbana, Illinois: Bedford/St. Martins, 1999. 43 – 50.
Daiker, Donald A. “Learning to Praise.” Writing and Response: Theory, Practice, and Research. Ed. Chris M. Anson. Urbana, Illinois: NCTE. 103 – 113.
Haswell, Janis, Richard Haswell, and Glenn Blalock. “Hospitality in College Composition Courses.” College Composition and Communication 60.4 (June 2009): 1 – 21.