Cathy and Cynthia Selfe

Cynthis Selfe along with her frequent co-author have been encouraging and promoting a changing view of Technology and computers in composition studies. Cathy, very clearly in the beginning of her presentation, makes us aware of the diversity of Cynthia Selfe and her long list of areas of expertise.In her career Selfe has taught Hypertext theory, computers in writing , Grammar and Editing, Literature and Lore and .... Science Fiction. Seems to be a very versatile Gal - go girl. She apparently knows and writes about the Lore of the upper Peninsula of Michigan, Technical writing, Computers in pedagogy , Technical Communication and Visual Rhetoric!

Her first work was , The Benevolent Beast: Computer-Assisted Instruction for the teacher of Writing, 1983. In 1989 Selfe began writing with Hawisher as co-editors of Critical Perspectives on Computers and Composition. Besides her contribution to composition and computers, she also writes about Feminist theory in composition, literacy, educational reform, and writing comprehension. I am only guessing what is Writing comprehension. Could it be writing so others can easily understand your point, your argument? Would it be that the writer is literate enough - fluent and clear enough for the reader? Or is this about the reader ? The student of writing should be able to grasp what theories different authors prefer and how they apply those theories?

She and others would argue that visual information can be regarded as text, and that the power relationship between words and pictures is one that is not co-dependent, but rather it is inspirational. "Words inspire pictures just as pictures inspire words." This seems to me to be true and it is worthy of a reminder of it's truth. It has been true in fact before computers.

Summaries are always a good idea and Cathy's addition of Selfe's important ideas was helpful to this reader. The first point is that Selfe maintains that teachers must incorporate technology into the classrooms -and into their ( the teachers' )lives, because the students are using it. This one applies to me. Selfe would tell me that I must not let the gap between student and teacher to widen!

Secondly, we as teachers must not teach our students to be " indulgers "of technology ( by letting it be a babysitter, play games, or get carried away with "style alone." Instead we must teach them to be technology scholars.

Finally we must be aware of the power of technology to be a means of liberation or a means of oppression. In their article," The Rhetoric of Technology and the Electronic Writing Class," Selfe and Hawisher caution teachers that they must "assess ways in which the use of technology might shape, for better or for worse, their strategies for working with students."

It takes careful planning, they contend, to incorporate computers into our classes. We must not fall into the trap of continuing to make the teacher the lone power in the classroom, with teaching doing all the talking and students only listening, while not being encouraged to make contributions. They add also that drill and kill practice grammar software is also not a good use of computers in the classroom. ( I am not familiar with these kill and drill grammar exercises online) However, I would be interested to find out if these exercises could apply explicitly to give practice to L2 students in specific areas where they are weak or missing skills.

As with any new tools in the classroom, we must remain diligent to use technology in positive smart ways to help students continue their composition and discourse in a different ways.

Rhonda with Yancey

Yancey is a promoter of effective communications. Therefore she is interested in (print and electronic) portfolios, technology, and teaching students. She is an advocate for teachers and students and seeks to improve students' writing and critical thinking.

However, she also has the goal to help students develop into global citizens making cinnections between work and the world. She is enthusiastic about teachers using technology in the classroom - word processors, Blackboard, projectors, and internet, to help students become part of a global public writing.

Yancey is also interested in developing the Fifth canon - Delivery. Technology opens up new space for invention and multi ways of delivery as we witnessed with Rhonda's presentation. At one time I had started to learn about Hyper text and now I am inspired to continue my education in this canon of ( electronic )delivery.

Yancey is both student centered and teacher centered and it woulod seem she is encouraging both to use the technology that we have now and build on it. She also demonstrated her interest in teachers as she graciously engaged in an email conversation with Rhonda for our benefit.

Erika Lindemann with Rebecca

I always appreciate a warm up when about to receive new information of which I may or may not have background. For that reason I enjoyed Rebecca's "write-around," the thinking that came from the written discourse, and thus the social construct activity. Also the meaty hand-out was organized and easy to follow.

Erika Lindemann is a leader in Writing Program Administration. As such she is concerned about what will dominate the content of freshmen composition classes. She argues that it should not be literature as the time students would need to discuss the issues of the literature will take away from a focus on writing. In addition students would only earn to respond to literature and not other forms of writing.

However, she will not debate whether or not under-prepared students should be attempting to complete a degree program. Instead, Lindemann says the university should be asking these students, "what should we teach them and how?" I champion her statement that the university has accepted students and now it should support them academically with tutors or writing centers or both.

Rebecca quoted Lindemann to say that instead of having a literature centered freshmen class,,
"we ought instead to appreciate - the varieties and excellences of academic discourse." I may not disagree but it is still not clear to me what exactly she would have as content in the composition class. Yes, they will focus on planning, drafting, revising, using data etc., but about what will they write?

Through her concerns and questions that she uses to create assignments, Lindemann is clearly in tune with the needs of freshmen students, especially those who are not quite "s0-called college level writing."

On collaboration and peer tutoring with Thomas

Thomas presented to us the composition theorist Kenneth Bruffee, born in 1934, and so part of the rise in theories concerning collaborative learning. He also was one of the first, when traditional Rhetoric was coming back, to promote social constructionism.
Thomas explained that during the 70's and 80's there was growth in the number of nontraditional learners in college. These students were alienated by the LARGE classrooms with to many students. I can confirm this fact as I was in classes of 200 at a time for the first two years of college. I could have fallen over dead and the professor may not have even see me.

The support that was given to these students was similar to the classroom situation. Bruffe and others looked into this and and adapted peer tutoring into the writing center.
Thomas explained with clear transistions, that he was beginning a new topic about Bruffee.

Bruffee believed that students in college and beyond could pool their ideas in a collaborative classroom and in that way construct knowledge amongst them. The teacher may still be facilitator and must uphold this ongoing conversation. Equally important is peer tutoring.

Bruffee also states that though Cooperative learning seems similar to Collaborative work, it is not. Cooperative learning is for younger students and designed to lower competition, while Collaborative learning encourages discussion that brings disagreement and so enhances education. Bruffee sounds like a precursor of Graff who said "teach to the conflicts" to encourage learning. Finally Bruffee argues that "knowledge is collaboration with other people."
He does warn that through Peer tutoring and collaborative learning, students must be trained in how to uphold the ongoing conversation.

While Thomas' presentation had a large amount of print to read from the power point , his hand out had all the important information neatly summarized in four paragraphs.

I appreciated Nic's organized style as he broke down into three distinct fields - Richard Lanham's career. As Nic talked about Lanham's expert witness role when he evaluated the validity of claims -plagiarism and intellectual property, I wondered if Lanham was an attorney, as I had thought this work was only carried out by lawyers.

On digital Literacy, Lanham seems to have joined the ranks of our recent authors from Computers in the Composition Classroom ( or visa versa) when he said that we should rethink digital literacy and pay attention to the needs of the students in this 'new literacy.' Similarly the CCCC Position Statement included the acceptance of technology as an asset in composing composition, but includes their own list of recommended guidelines.

Lanham speaks of face to face , and one on one as being the best education. and Ohmann airs his prejudice towards technological determinism and the claims that technology will transform the workplace and the home not to mention the school, and how parents and students are worried about keeping up with technological literacy. Yet there are more concerns - that some schools are not responding well to the new information age, and perhaps the computers are not being used to improve learning.

So with all that technology can do for students and businesses ( making money) there are questions posed about the future. Back to Lanham: He says the issue is not that we don't have enough computers or information, in fact we have too much information in this age of information and there is a struggle to get people's attention. The economy or the rhetoric of attention! how do we get the attention of our readers or students. We must be "well seen , well heard and well read . "

It would seem, according to Lanham, that one answer is style ( of rhetoric). He maintains that that the style of our composition is as important as content. He might say it is more important!
If there is a change in the font, the style and size of the words can cause the reader will stop to think what does this mean! Perhaps with graphics, and animation and other media mixed in, of course the right balance, then surely the style will say something to the reader and make her pause and think about the meaning. "Brevity, clarity and sincerity! Language should be expressive!" says Lanham.

Oh, and I love the Paramedic Method of Revision. Thanks for putting on your handout!