I have been lurking with great interest lately, but I can't lurk
after Judy wrote:
>Last night, my daughter, who is 16 and in grade 11, asked me to read her
>English essay, which was on the referendum ("write a 500 word editorial on
>a current topic from the news that you feel strongly about"). It was a good
>essay--she'd been following the debate closely--but she was concerned that she
>hadn't followed all of her teacher's instructions. So I read the sheet of
>instructions. This is what it said: "Be sure that you take a stand for or against
>something. Do not try to represent a reasoned moderate argument or to present
>both sides of the issue."
>
For years, we have asked our first year engineers to write
persuasively on a controversial issue. We get some excellent
results and many more not so good results. For many of our first years,
notions such as writing to a specific person or group, taking the
concerns, values, and beliefs of readers into account, adapting an appropriate
tone, and writing in the first person, where appropriate, are clearly
new concepts that make them uncomfortable because they see them as
breaking "the rules" for writing.
The other day one student told me that he doesn't know how to write a
letter because all he has ever written is, and I quote, "the 5-paragraph essay."
I've read a number of letters this week that were essays (of a
certain sort) with "I think" and "I believe" tacked on to "address
readers." And some of my students (this year and in past years) argue
that accepting any points in favour of the "opposition" weakens their
arguments.
I've long suspected that somebody was giving students the idea that
an argument is one-sided--and that good writing requires swallowing a
dictionary and writing vague, rambling sentences. I want to resist
thinking that some of the problems I see year after year result from
instructions like those Judy's daughter was given. (Could the "not"
be a typo?) But the evidence sits on my desk and is supported
by the conversations I have with students about their assignments.
In subtle or blatant ways, far too many of the next generation (here
in BC at least) are being taught to think in ways that I'm sure
frighten us all.
Perhaps because engineering is governed by a code of ethics and
professional conduct is part of the package, I feel comfortable
refusing to accept certain kinds of arguments (women have smaller
brains than men, any attempt to increase the number of women in
engineering is unfair to men). I frequently require students to answer
my objections and in the process they usually modify their positions
or tell me that they didn't know what to write on and so picked any
topic (at which point they usually come up with a new one). I strongly
suspect that some, faced with opposition, simply give us what they think
we want, but others do recognize a problem in their thinking and change
their perspective (which is often evident in class discussions).
I'm leaving these thoughts mid-stream because its time to head off to
class. So, for now at least, that's my two bits worth.
Susan Stevenson
