Throughout the semester, I've very much enjoyed reading Joe Harris' book, "Rewriting: How to Do Things with Texts." On Monday, Joe Harris came to IU to give a presentation about teaching writing, based on this book. As a student teacher and a writing tutor, there were several points in his presentation that I made a note of to use when I'm talking to my students or the college students who come into WTS about their writing.
1. The "Project" of the writer vs. the "Main Idea"
Harris prefers to have students find the "project" of the writer rather than the "main idea." It's a simple change of term, but it leads to a more helpful way to begin looking at another writer's purpose and a way to begin the process of "coming to terms." The idea of the writer's "main idea" is fairly static. It brings to mind asking "What's the point?" It can also lead to oversimplification - it's tempting to construct the author's intent as one statement, one purpose, and one explicit intent. Using the idea of "project" leads to a more complex and accurate statement about what the writer is trying to do that incorporates the writer's aim, main ideas, thesis, methods, sources, and more. Of course, it is a more complicated idea to teach, and therefore it takes more time to teach and explain. "Main idea" is fairly self-explanatory. Still, the extra teaching time is worth it - both for the students benefit and the benefit of the writer's whose work they are examining.
2. Assessing a text's uses and limits
This idea is somewhat related to the idea of the writer's project, but it moves from simply deciding what the writer is doing (coming to terms) to evaluating how the writer achieves his/her project (countering). On Monday, Harris articulated this concept by asking two questions, "What is the writer trying to do, and what do they actually do?" Other questions under this concept might be, "Who would find this text useful, and for what is it useful?" or "Where would this text fall short of its aims, or who might not find this useful?"
Both of the above ideas I think would be helpful in talking with students who are stuck, or having trouble getting started on their papers, or who aren't sure whether they understand the texts they need to use.
3. Uncovering Unstated Assumptions
This concept is a really tough one for a lot of the students I tutor, and even after Joe Harris' talk, I'm struggling to make it easier to understand. Harris expressed this as "What concepts, beliefs, or values does the text rely on but not talk about?" That helped clarify the topic, but I am still wondering how to help students identify the underlying assumptions accurately.
4. "What can you say at the end that you could not say at the beginning?"
Hooray!! All semester, I have been struggling to find SOMETHING to say when I try to explain what should go into a conclusion to students that I tutor. (The standard W131 answer of "it's the So What?" just doesn't work. Far too broad.) When Joe Harris said this, I was quite excited and wrote it down, KNOWING I would use it in tutorials. This way of explaining a conclusion also fits in with the idea that an argument should unfold and develop over the course of the paper, rather than simply prove the thesis.
5. My absolute favorite thing that Joe Harris said was, "We should point out to our students what works and say, 'Do more of that!'" This is such a valuable teaching/tutoring technique and sometimes, in our haste to point out all of the things that are wrong, we forget to point out things that work, so that the student has some idea of what TO do when they start to fix stuff. And, as always, a little praise goes a long way in motivating a student to keep working.
After reading "Rewriting" and hearing Joe Harris speak, what I have most taken away is the idea that texts are live, practical, useful things, active pieces of discourse which are in conversation with other texts all the time. And, frankly, this makes me excited.
