HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:27:33 CST
From:         Bob Boston <S2.RSB@ISUMVS.IASTATE.EDU>
Subject:      More Info on Forum

A few people asked for more info on Forum after my posting of 12/27/92, so
here goes:

Forum is an asynchronous communication program for networked Macintosh
computers. It can also work synchronously with up to eight simultaneous users.
I wrote it after Karen Schwalm told me about her Electronic Journals at the
1990 C&W Conference in Austin. Like her E-Journals, I intended Forum to allow
students to participate in class discussions outside of class time.

For example, for my screenwriting class I reserve library videotapes which the
students are required to watch during the semester.  For each movie, I
establish a Forum file consisting of a "kickoff question" about some aspect of
the screenplay. Students watch the movies in whatever order they wish
throughout the semester and then join in the Forum discussions on those films.

Other teachers establish a new Forum file every week or two and transfer the
old files to MS-Word as archives. Their students discuss several topics
sequentially throughout the term. Each Forum could deal with salient features
of the current writing assignment, for example.

Because Forum records the date, time and length of each student's contribution
to each file, teachers can see which students are participating in the various
Forum discussions.  Some teachers set a minimum participation level -- 300
words a week, perhaps-- to get the students started, but I've found that such
a requirement becomes unnecessary when the discussions really start rolling.

Forum is not a mail system; users do not choose to read individual messages.
Instead, each message is appended to the existing file, which looks like a
compacted InterChange session. (Great minds and all that.) Forum uses Mac's
built-in text editor which has a 32K capacity.  If a file exceeds 32K, Forum
scrolls off the first part of the file, displaying about 20K at the end of the
file. When this happens, the teacher can use a word processor to split the
large file into smaller units, each of which can be displayed by Forum.

Finally, in my announcement of 12/27 I specified an 800K Mac disk, but you can
send a 1.4M disk if you wish.  The point is that Forum, Forum Admin, and the
documentation files will all fit on a single 3-1/2" Mac floppy.

Bob Boston
CWC Coordinator
Iowa State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Dec 1992 12:21:34 EST
From:         "David Tillyer, CCNY" <DATCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Standardizing Composition Cl

On Wed, 30 Dec 1992 08:33:00 CST <SLATIN@UTXVM> said:
>Hey, Karen, good to hear from you! and Happy New Year to all.  I think the
>Writing-Intensive On-Line Learning ENvironment (I tried to come up with
>something that made for a better acronym, but gave up) is a long way from
>happening at UT in any official institutional way-- though at some level it
>already exists, judging by reports I get from and of students staying up all
>environments.  Setting up this sort of thing requires, at a minimum, that

stuff deleted
>every student and every faculty member have automatic access to a campus
>computing account, something we're hoping to set up by next Fall.  That of
>course requires funding from somewhere, a problematic issue of course at any

John.  I am in the procesws of proposal writing for funding for broadeer use
of email in our writing courses in ESL and basic writing.  I know the
valuable incentive that email lends to writing and you know it, but what
cute ways have you found to let funding sources know?  My current proposal
is for research into writing improviement  (sorry about my keyboard, I'm trying
reconfigure it!()  soi  so I may have some hard date  data is in a year or so.
David
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 29 Dec 1992 08:49:41 EST
From:         rselfe@MTU.EDU
Subject:      Standardizing Composition Classes

This portion of David/s aptly descriptive post on the issues of
standardized syllabi reminds me again of how important timing seems to be
in many of the MBU discussions.

>More than anything, it gives our instructors an
>initial point of reference in their development as teachers. At first, it may
>be a crutch or life raft; it may become the backbone of the instructor's own
>approach; it may become an approach to be rejected (when the instructor is
>capable of making a case against the syllabus and for another approach). . . .

In this case, an underlying issue seems to be how soon an instructor is
allowed to make a "case against the syllabus and for another approach."
Most entering instructors, no matter how experienced they are, probably
should expect SOME structure during their first terms of teaching in a new
setting.  If they are then allowed to propose a course structure more
suited to their own teaching style and condusive to program goals, then it
seems the 'damage' caused by a standard syllabus is minimized.

So my question is

What is the process for allowing those with innovative ideas to propose
alternatives to the standard course?

At MTU, I believe, after one quarter of rewriting the standard syllabus
(using their own language) and discussing those syllabi in a graduate
teaching seminar, GTAs are free to propose alternative courses.  I'm not
sure what the procedure is for approving those proposals or what percentage
of the GTAs take advantage of that option.  Perhaps Cindy or Marilyn Cooper
can ellaborate.




^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dickie Selfe              rselfe@mtu.edu
Humanities Dept.          906-487-3225
Michigan Technological U.
Houghton, MI   49931
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3_uno PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:39:04 CST
From:         Irvin Peckham <peckham@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: our teachers, our students
              92 10:48 am

> from the end of this semester.  I finally realized things weren't going to
> change and my principal role was to maintain the status quo; the only points
 at
> which I was able to get inand make change were points that depended on adjunct
> faculty doing extra work (like portfolios).  I don't mind working hard, but I
> have to see some good for somebody coming out of it.  Are you too young?
 Maybe,
> but you'll grow old quickly runing a writing program!!  Best of luck.
> Liz Hamp_Lyons
> English/Applied Language
> University of Colorado, Denver
> LHAMPLYONS@cudnvr.denver.colorado.edu
>
Liz:
I realize you may have more experience than I have and that maybe
in time I will be worn down (although I admit freely that I look to
David--although he may not realize it since we disagreee on several
imporant issues--as a model).  I am 48.  First year in directing a
writing program (spent a lot of time teaching high school); I have
seen a program here, with a _lot_ of help from some very savvy adjunct
teachers, move from a 1950's exemplary current traditional model to
something that Moffett and Elbow would at least nod to.  Upshot:
students get better teaching.  That's something.  Maybe the "new"
teaching will be shot down next year, but I'll see.

Actually, my message was that i wish you would not bow out.
Irv

--
Irvin Peckham
University of Nebraska at Omaha
peckham@unomaha.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 28 Dec 1992 11:58:29 EST
From:         adams01@VAX.KVCC.EDU
Subject:      RE: Standardizing Composition Classes

David, Your thoughts on the standardized syllabus are interesting.  I teach
at Kalamazoo Valley Community College, and we have successfully incorporated
a "standardized" syllabus into our programs.  The departmental syllabus is
composed of the college's goals, the learning objectives (established by the
faculty), the number of assignments, and the grading scale.  Each instructor--
full and part-time--incorporates the goals, objectives, and grading scale
into her syllabus.  The specific assignments--type, length, etc.--are left up
to the individual.  Using this standardized syllabus as a point of departure
gives us some uniformity across courses and offers part-timers as well as new
full-timers some help in preparing for their classes.

Having recently worked on revising the departmental syllabus for our
developmental writing course, I can say that getting the right balance
between standardization and enough freedom to satisfy the faculty is a
real pain.  It can't be done if the faculty does not actively participate.
Of course, there are always those who don't contribute at all and are the
first (and most vocal, too) to complain about having their freedom curtailed.
Ron Adams
Communication Arts
KVCC
6767 West O Ave.
Kalamazoo MI 49009
adams01@vax.kvcc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Samford University Writing Programs
X-Acknowledge-To: <DHROBERT@SAMFORD>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Thu, 31 Dec 1992 22:46:16 CST
From:         "David H. Roberts" <DHROBERT@SAMFORD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: High school/college comp cou

David S:
On Writing Project sites being the most effective link between college
and public schools:

You are right--effective, useful, and hard work.  I have started two
NWP sites, one in Mississippi and one in Alabama.  Although I have had
faculty appointments inEnglish, the department doesn't care to know that
the site exists or that the link is effective.  I am always scrounging
for $ to keep the thing operational and always criticized for spending
too much time in the public schools and too little time teaching
classes.  No matter that I bring in more external funding than the cost
of my released time, the bottom line is STUDETN CREDIT HOURS GENERATED!
And, in the department, of course, literature reigns over comp/rhet.

My wife nearly divorced me when I started the 2nd writing project site,
barely a year after my first heart atack and a month before my second.

Still, the writing project work is the most important thing I've done &
and the most effective teaching I've ever been involved in.

   __________________________________________
   David H. Roberts
   Director of University Writing Programs
   Samford University
   Birmingham, AL 35229-2207 USA
   Voice: (205) 870-2964; Fax: (205) 870-2384
   Bitnet:  DHROBERT@SAMFORD
   CIS:     72630,3633
   __________________________________________
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"MBU-L%TTUVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Mon, 28 Dec 1992 14:15:51 -0500
From:         R_CONNORS@UNHH.UNH.EDU
Subject:      RE: Standardizing Composition Classes

Nothing grinchish about your proposal, Sharon.  It makes utter sense.
Anyone who's read the history knows that Freshman English as it developed
from 1880 to today is a bad answer to the wrong question.  We probably
don't work harder to dump it because we are so often implicated in it
institutionally.

Burroughs:

I recall talking to an American who worked for the Aftosa Commission
in Mexico.  Six hundred a month plus expense account.
     "How long will the epidemic last?" I enquired.
     "As long as we can keep it going. . . .And yes. . . maybe the
aftosa will break out in South America," he said dreamily.

						--Naked Lunch

To what degree are we all implicated in required first-year comp?  How
many of us would really pull the plug on it if we could?

Bob C.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 29 Dec 1992 11:20:15 AST
Comments:     <29DEC92.12251581.0172.MUSIC@UNB.CA>
From:         Russ Hunt <HUNT@UNB.CA>
Subject:      Re: High school/college comp courses

     Putting together Sharon's wonderful explanation of what's
wrong with requiring freshman comp and Mary O'Sullivan's comment
on giving college credit for high school courses leads to a
troubling reflection.  Having a defense plant in your town
facilitates rationalization wonderfully.  When we argue that
students shouldn't "get credit" for writing courses taken in high
school, what's really at stake?  Is it the students, or is it the
protection of the college comp infrastructure?  It won't do, I
think, for us to say that "Students need all the writing
instruction they can get" and that "we do them a disservice by by
offering them less."  The way writing instruction is actually
offered, in practice (as Sharon makes clear) renders this a
pretty empty generalization.  I think students need something
different in the way of situations in which writing can be
learned, and I'm unconvinced that required courses -- in high
school or anywhere else -- is the way to do it.  Even if it's all
we can do.
                                    -- Russ
                                __|~_
Russell A. Hunt            __|~_)_ __)_|~_   Learning and Teaching
Department of English      )_ __)_|_)__ __)     Development Office
St. Thomas University        |  )____) |        EMAIL: hunt@unb.ca
Fredericton, New Brunswick___|____|____|____/  FAX: (506) 450-9615
E3B 5G3   CANADA          \                / PHONE: (506) 452-7700
                       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:21:58 CST
From:         Eric Crump <C509379@MIZZOU1.BITNET>
Subject:      apology for conferencing
              23 Dec 1992 22:26:07 CST from <peckham@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU>

On Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:26:07 CST Irvin Peckham said:
>institutionally, such a scheme [conferencing] is unworkable.
>  At any rate, I no longer hold conferences.  I found myself
>pressed for time and telling my students what to write--not
>a good way to do it, I know.  Maybe I'm just accepting a
>fallen world.  At any rate, I now push my students to learn
>how to help each other.  I remember (as I am sure all of us
>do) that when I learned most was when I taught.

Institutionally unworkable? I think we're talking about two different
things, Irv. You're referring only to teacher-student conferences,
right? (and as Bill Condon has said--they can work great under the
right circustances). I assume you don't mean to suggest that
conferencing itself, as a valid writing development situation, is
unworkable. Folks like me, who work in writing centers, who
specialize in working with writers one-to-one, might take issue with
such an assertion.

I agree a million percent with your efforts to get writers to
help each other, but I don't think that strategy in any way
precludes using the local writing center, in most cases. A
lot of writing centers employ peer tutors, so in effect, students
*are* helping each other when they visit a wc. And those centers
that do not hire many peer tutors, like ours, often encourage
the graduate tutors to treat undergraduate writers like colleagues.
And writing centers are not generally susceptible to the two
problems you and Russ identify: time and grades. In writing centers,
writers meet with someone who has a decent chunk of time available
to give full attention to talking about writing. No competition
for that time--it's all theirs. Of course, writing centers are not
unaffected by the sinister effects of grades, but it makes a big
difference that no one there is *giving* the blasted things.

Before you write off conferencing, I'd suggest checking with your
local writing center, see what possibilities there are for pointing
your students toward that resource.

--Eric Crump
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Dec 1992 09:17:00 CST
From:         SLATIN@UTXVM.BITNET
Subject: RE: High school/college comp

Point taken, Bill.  What I'm really looking for is some way to coordinate
relationships between primary and secondary curricula on the one hand and
postsecondary curricula on the other; I don't really care which end the
impulses come from, so long as they're creative impulses and so long as they
don't get stifled by the kind of bureaucratic thinking you describe.  Maybe we
need a Renaissance weekend.  Hilton Head, anyone?

John Slatin
UT Austin
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:28:57 -0700
From:         "David E. Schwalm" <IACDES@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Standardizing sections of composition

Bill, how do you ensure (within some reasonable limit) that the tasks various
teachers pose for their students are of comparable difficulty? It's one thing
to get an A on a simple front dive from a three meter board, another to get an
A on a back 3-and-a-half with a full twist. Also, how do novice teachers know
what methods suit them best? What if your standard syllabus combines a variety
of methods (as ours does) in order to reach students with different learning
style preferences? Does a standard syllabus imply a lockstep program? Is it
possible that the methods that suit teachers best may not be the methods that
suit students best (some TAs are really comfortable standing behind the desk
and lecturing to their students)? Hey, give me a staff of trained and
knowledgeable composition instructors and a clear set of program goals, and
I'd be glad to can the syllabus. But give me a staff of new TAs and other
folks who would really rather be teaching literature, and I'll keep the
syllabus. (An aside while I'm at it: while each student is a unique
individual, it may not be terribly useful to assume that each student's
writing problems are unique or even that every section is wildly different.
There is no science of the individual, and teaching becomes virtually
impossible. All we can do is marvel.) In any case, I agree that standardizing
the syllabus may restrict a few people. But I would argue that a standard
syllabus gives many teachers, especially novices, some approach to teaching
when, on their own, they would have none. If it's a good syllabus, it can give
teachers good methods of teaching when, on their own, they might adopt poor
methods. And for rebel TAs, it gives them something to attack, some point of
reference for developing their own methods, and "expert opinion" they have to
explode before they can implement their own "better" methods.

-- David E. Schwalm, Assoc. Provost for Academic Programs
___Arizona State University West
___4701 West Thunderbird Rd.
___Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100___(602) 543-4500
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:53:32 CST
From:         Bob Whipple <whippl@PARROT.CREIGHTON.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Standard English / time of class/day
              Shimabukuro" at Dec 23, 92 5:53 am

James--and all--

you mention the time of day as a variable that affects the composition class--
indeed, any class.

Somewhere in my graduate education I heard that a survey someone ran showed
that the time of day makes no discernible difference in the quality of
a class.

Now, I know that "quality of class" is impossibly vague.  But has anyone else
heard of such a survey?  Am I such an intensely morning person that I'm
alone in avoiding afternoon classes (I use afternoons to attend to writing
program business)?  Or do others feel the same way?

Joyeux Noel, y'all.

--
Bob Whipple
Director of Composition		Creighton University
2500 California Plaza		Omaha, NE 68178
(402) 280-2534			rhetoric@creighton.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3_uno PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:05:25 CST
From:         Irvin Peckham <peckham@CWIS.UNOMAHA.EDU>
Subject:      Re: apology for conferencing

Eric:
In brief reply to your correction of my facile writing-off
conferencing.  I was, as you note, referring only to the
classroom situation--and am still ready to reconsider conferencing
in the classroom.  I know that students make tremendous gains
when you can sit down with them in a one-on-one situation with
no time schedule attached.  The writing centers, I am sure,
supply the kind of individual attention writers frequently need.
Wish we had one here.  You of course know the problems with
starting one.  I think I was perhaps suggesting a rethinking
of the conferencing strategy as a necessary part of the
classroom.
Irv
--
Irvin Peckham
University of Nebraska at Omaha
peckham@unomaha.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:52:50 CST
From:         Eric Crump <C509379@MIZZOU1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Standardizing

David:
When you say you make the case for collaboration by "having TAs
engage in" group activities, does that mean you allow or encourage team
teaching for inexperienced teachers? I've always thought that might be a
good way to help alleviate the terror of that first teaching assignment,
giving new teachers a better opportunity to share what experience and
resources they have--and feel safer--rather than letting them dangle in
the breeze, alone and exposed.

There was a good article in C&C recently by Valerie Balester et al.
(can't remember who "et al." were, unfortunately) about collaborative
teaching using computers.

--Eric Crump
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University at Buffalo
X-Envelope-to: MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"MBU-L@TTUVM1.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: ENGMYLES
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.mbu-l
Date:         Wed, 30 Dec 1992 11:00:32 -0500
From:         ENGMYLES@UBVMS.BITNET
Subject: RE: High school/college comp

there are state boards, depts of ed, transfer problems, etc, everything
must be translated into equivalents.  I don't see, on its face, why
6 week blocks can't be translated into hour equivalents -- might take an
argument, but everything else does too.
the players in establishing curricula and grad and entry requirements are
diffusely spread around any given state, and the Educational Testing Service.
colleges cannot deal with the same student populations highschools deal with,
unless you admit all high school graduates.
Better concentrate on the populations we are likely to admit; or do we want
the non-college-headed populations to change what we do?  I can think of worse
things.
and the relationship between a ph.d. and a high school curriculum is at best
indirect, no?
Myles
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU