betajames

Context for those who may need it: 

Above is a shot of the whiteboard at the conclusion of the second session of ENG 560, spring semester. The session began by addressing a couple burning questions, 1) to book or not to book and 2) the role and responsibilities of Student #15. I wanted to address the book question because I think it was shrugged off in the first session. I wanted to make sure we gave some time to thinking more about the intended result of our work. Those who brought up the idea of something other than a book (SOTAB) outed themselves as troublemakers, but I think the discussion was fruitful and helpful. In putting forth an argument for SOTAB, JS declared, "I want what I write to be read," thereby invoking questions of both access and recognition. However, RA expressed a preference for a "fixed ending" and the idea that a book, perhaps more than any other written form, implies a conclusion to work. RW identified SOTAB as "shooting below the target," given both the initial idea for the course as well as their own expectations. A number of other students admitted that much of their interest in ENG 560 was the potential end result, i.e., a Book.

My initial approach to the course concerned such a result. While it may be on the way out, a book is still probably what students in UM-Flint's MA in English Language and Literature program are most familiar with. Going for SOTAB opens up the need to navigate many different avenues, from knowledge and objective to outcome and skill. Of course, all of these are wrapped up in the question of time. While there are simple tools available to put together SOTAB, I feel that we would need more than 8 weeks to anywhere near completion. Given these concerns, I was somewhat relieved that ENG 560 agreed to stick with the original plan of writing a book.

However, what #560wr decided for Student #15 is now rather moot because a student withdrew from the course this morning due to impending scheduling conflicts. With no more Student #15, we are without an assistant editor, one responsible for greater proofreading duties as well as crafting the 5-page introduction and 5-page conclusion to the book we're writing. With an even number of 14 students now enrolled, roles and responsibilities are pretty standard; we just need to figure out any possible jostling of positions regarding who will be contributing to the writing of which chapter. 

Then again, we are early enough in this process to perhaps consider still having an assistant editor and/or someone whose role and responsibilities align with the following comment:

I was thinking what about someone to serve as an laborer to set the type for the reference page(s)/table of contents (?)/ someone to write an intro or summary or something. a 15th person could serve well as an editorial type (like copy editing and all that) because I can well imagine any of us getting really attached to our respective sections and kind of needing an objective eye to help with things. I don't know if I like the term "editor" because that implies that the 15th person is somehow above the process or higher on the pecking order than anyone else. Maybe a text custodian or something.

I think a course documentarian could be another possibility, either in addition to or instead of an assistant editor. While I'm working here to document our process, I know I can't give the fullest view. Having another perspective could be quite helpful. Given some of the later rumblings about the initial scope of this collaborative writing project, perhaps a few students will appreciate having alternatives.

These early discussions about SOTAB and Student #15, though, introduced other areas of concern, including initial scope, target audience, potential chapters, etc. The more conversation about how and what and why we wanted to write the book, the more students began shutting down and/or pledging allegiance to apathy. I think it was to the great relief of many that I read direct from last week's entry regarding scope, audience, and chapters. It appeared that the entire class was all too willing to pursue my perspective and understanding of last week's session as opposed to their own. MG even went so far as to assume control over the whiteboard while some suffered quiet Type A freakouts and others joked about how to make this book turn a profit (sell for $.99 on Amazon and have interstitial chapters about vampires in jeggings). 

That's not to write that no valid concerns were raised, though. A perceived lack of originality (common in academic writing, I think) in our initial scope may be evident, but it's difficult to say with confidence until after further research. SA explained how we might adopt some of Peter Elbow's language in "Embracing Contraries" for our own purposes. JD put forth the helpful phrase "social role in relation to..." as a possible guiding light for our collective work.

Speaking of which, here is where I think we stand now:

1. AA and MBr will be writing Chapter 1, which will focus on how we define "social role."
2. BW and JW will be writing Chapter 2, which will focus on the history of the social role of the writing teacher
3. RA and SA will be writing Chapter 3, which will focus on how writing teachers determine their social role
4. SL and MG will be writing Chapter 4, which will focus on how others determine the social role of the writing teacher
5. JS and MBo will be writing Chapter 5, which will focus on special considerations of the social role of the writing teacher
6. KC and JD will be writing Chapter 6, which will focus on the social role of the writing teacher in relation to pedagogy
7. JB and KM will be writing Chapter 7, which will focus on possible counters to the social role of the writing teacher

I do not expect us to stand here for very long, given the loss of Student #15. Though we have plans for the next two weeks, there should be time sufficient to discuss the necessity of an assistant editor and/or alternatives.

The second session of ENG 560, spring semester, concluded with some comments from me about the next two weeks. Having agreed to an initial scope, target audience, and potential chapters, research should begin. So, for the next two weeks, we will present strong academic work in relation to the initial scope of our collaborative writing project. These presentations will be 5 minutes in length with a timing set for 20 seconds per slide. As each student is required to bring 10 total sources to the project, I expect each presentation to include 5 sources. This will mean 15 slides in all for one presentation with a full minute spent on each source introduced. During each minute, there should be justification of interest, summary, and suitability. I'm also hoping for no huge block quotes on slides as that much text will be impossible to read.