Perspectives on Writing and Rhetoric (Eng 3040)

The 3040 class is a general-education (depth), upper-division writing class at Utah State University. (I usually refer to it as an advanced composition class.) Non-English-majors typically enroll, and the theme changes depending on the faculty member who teaches it.

———————————

Fall 2004 summary
Fall 2004 was the first time that I taught English 3040. The focus was on multimodal composition, and the students created websites that demonstrated their rhetorical understanding of writing and design. Due to technological and scheduling constraints, however, the students were aggravated by their inability to complete what I was supposed to be teaching: video-editing, which I had been asked to teach but the lab was not capable of handing. This class was a huge teaching challenge for me, and I rewrote the syllabus several times upon discovery of each technological hindrance. I quickly learned what the lab could accommodate and worked closely with the systems administrator to update the hardware that I would need to teach this class in future semesters.

• sections taught in department this term: 1
• number of students enrolled: 25

——————————–

Spring 2005 summary
This course went much better than the Fall 2004 version. I changed the syllabus to accommodate the technological resources the department had, and the focus was on literary hypertexts. The course objectives — which included having students read about, analyze, and produce creative, digital texts — were spelled out for them from the beginning of the term. We were able to produce new media videos as a final project.

• sections taught in department this term: 2 (mine & ‘medical writing’ which is technically offered through the Biology department, although they use our course number)
• number of students enrolled: 18

———————————-

Summer 2005 summary
I taught this version of the class as a 5-day workshop (which at Utah State counted as a full, 3-credit class). I truncated the syllabus dramatically to overview all history and theory about electronic literature in the first day and had students working on video poems by the beginning of the second day. They had three days to complete all progress on the videos, which they presented to each other and to department colleagues in an open house on Friday morning.

• number of students enrolled: 18
• no other sections

———————————-

Fall 2006 summary
This is the third time I taught this course (in a full semester), although it was still a new prep because I kept changing the theme and major projects as the lab gathered more resources. The focus for Fall 2006 was on digital narratives. Students read about and produced a range of digital, narrative texts including iMixes, voiceovers, vogs, video or audio documentaries, and a final project of their choice. The assignments focus on how to rhetorically choose media that will meet the purpose and audience expectations of a given genre (or mixed-genre text).

• sections taught in department this term: 2 (mine & ‘medical writing’, offered through the Biology Department)
• number of students enrolled: 17

——————————–

teaching innovations
By the time I taught this class for the second time, I was able to procure [through the department and the Vice President of Research] digital video cameras for the students to use as well as hardware updates to accommodate digital video-editing in the English department computer lab. Thus, I was able to have students complete the final assignment of a new media video poem. (The assignment is included in the accompanying materials.)

For the Fall 2006 class on digital narratives, I used blogs for the first time in my teaching as a way for students to explore public/private issues when composing narratives and also as a way for them to communicate mid-week since the class meets once a week. A single blog was used for both this undergraduate class and my graduate class on multimodal composition, so that students could play with issues of audience in their comments. (The students themselves didn’t have blogs; an innovation I didn’t pick up for another two years.)

narrative evaluations

• “I didn’t know what to expect, but I have really learned a lot from being here. My computer literacy, which was very low, grew a lot. I like how you have style and personality but still have the respeect because you know how to do it all.”
• “The learning about rhetoric was subtle and fun!”
• “Overall it was a fun class and was unexpectedly helpful with other classes and presentations. I liked learning about the 13 terms [from the ix: visual exercises CD, which we looked at in class] and how they relate to different kinds of communication. It’s cool to apply some of those terms to other things I’m doing in school. Thanks”
• “I love Cheryl…her outlook and assignments were great.”
• “Dr. Ball did really well in presenting the design considerations from the CD, and in teaching the class how to create web pages in Dreamweaver.”
• “I am very satisfied that the university hired Cheryl Ball to teach this new style of English course. I was able to learn more applicable communication skills in this class than I did in all of my years in AP/Honors English. Great job!”
• “Your teaching style really engages the class and makes it a fun class environment. I particularly liked the level of class discussion which you allowed. This really facilitated learning the subject matter.”
• “It was the most interesting English class I’ve ever taken. You got me looking at writing and the formats of my papers in a whole new way.”
• “Cheryl was very knowledgable and enthusiastic. It is a hands-on course that she actually gave us time to put our hands on.”
• “I really liked the way the class was more of a discussion. It helped me feel a part. I also thought the assignments were both educational and fun.”
• “It was good to learn new ways of looking at all things.”
• “She has studied this a long time and is good at it. She assigns the right amount of workload for the class. I liked discussing the readings; it’s more helpful than just taking a quiz on them.”

accompanying materials

• Spring 2005 syllabus
• Spring 2005 final project assignment
• Fall 2006 blog

see also

• “Reading the Text: A Rhetoric of Wow” (under Peer-Reviewed Articles; features discussion of an undergradute’s project from Summer 2005 course)
• “(Multimodal, multimedia, multigenre) Composition” (under Chapters; co-written with 2 undergraduates from the Fall 2006 semester)