Thursday, July 29 (DJ #3)

During our fall and spring cohort courses, we read a lot of articles on the pitfalls of the FPT, so I feel as though I can speak pretty eloquently to that. I think what Pirie says is particularly important: “the FPT is a valuable teaching tool; comp teachers just need to be sure that their students don’t perceive is as an end in itself” (76). This is absolutely crucial. The way to combat this mindset is to use authentic assessment as much as possible in the school environment. Though some might argue that the FPT IS in fact authentic because it allows students to pass high-stakes tests like the MCAs. However, I would argue that the FPT does not prepare students for college writing, resume and cover letter writing or logical-analytical writing that is necessary for math-science-computer careers. I also liked the metaphor he made of the paint-by-numbers kit: “the paint-by-numbers kit absolved me of any responsibility to do what real artists do, which is to experiment and make decisions about color and shape” (77). How will our students learn the varieties of writing if they are only given one style in which to practice. This is where I take the positive stance on teaching multi-genre writing in the composition classroom. Multi-genre also seems to be a way to be more inclusive of non-North-American styles of writing. I think that it is extremely valuable to give students the opportunity to construct their own writing using a variety of methods and organization schemes. They need to learn what works for them. This calls for a serious differentiation situation. I also found it particularly interesting that the author focused on the potential limitations of essays/papers written around a definitive thesis. He suggests, “It might be more useful for students to defer the drive for answers in favor of more thoughtful elaboration of questions” (80). I think that our need to base all of our writing assignments in one “closed thematic statement” comes from a North American cultural value of precise, scientific, research-based knowledge. One of the beauties of English/Language Arts is that it is NOT scientific. It is philosophical. It is hard to pin down. This is the arena in which we are allowed to talk about things like race, culture, gender and the “self.” This idea of creating “lateral contacts” is a great way to think about literature. Imagine if we tried to categorize species laterally rather than hierarchically. Literature is valuable in a different way than science. Literature allows for a more lateral relationship between the teacher and the students, the students with each other and students with the text. I think that secondary English class is a great time for students to experience a variety of different types of literature AND different writing styles. Giving them a FPT outline that just makes them “fill in the blanks” does not challenge them and to be quite frank it is telling them that they can’t do it themselves.
Now that I’ve ranted enough about the FPT to last me a while…I really enjoyed reading the suggestions for writing activities to use with multicultural texts. I think the idea to do an “Ibo Diary” (or something similar that related to the text) would work really well as a way to give students a chance to develop writing skills while simultaneously being cognizant of the way they and their peers construct knowledge based on cultural, personal and family experience. The dialogue presented in the Vinz text also seemed to be facilitated in an effective way. The teacher continuously re-focused the class to “work out of each other’s statements” which I thought was a really great way to get them to listen and truly hear one another. This forces them to think about language and how it is used differently by and for various audiences. Learning this skill will then translate into their critical thinking and reading skills.