Bridging the Gap Between Composition and Technical Writing

My saving grace in regard to the English Department is that I can be accepted and thrive in multiple academic environments, simultaneously. I have never been one to be pinned down to the sole constructs of any area of focus--I have dipped my pen in literature, rhetoric, composition, creative writing (short-fiction emphasis was my undergrad minor), and technical writing, of which I have an undergraduate degree. What I have to show for my roundedness other than a motley jacket of modern English nerdery is that the areas are all very similar--I dare not say "the same." With minor (if any) modifications, many of the same writing and critical thinking exercises applied in creative writing, tech writing, or academic composition could be used interchangeably. All focus is this: whatever is written (by you or someone else) will be read, therefore, you (or someone else) writes for a reason, and it is learning to see through these creative language usages that readers evolve into thinkers, thinkers into proponents of knowledge. Critical analysis of my own writing or someone else's has been the mainstay of my English education, and it is what I teach: Understand what you are reading, and you will be able to understand your own writing, and, therefore, yourself.

Back to the bridge of pedagogy, I infuse a proposal assignment, which is usually categorized as a component of technical writing, for the research paper. I have students analyze their topics and write a small, one-page explanation of what it is, why they are doing it, who will read it, and how they will go about their research. This allows students to enter the mind of a reader or audience member and see whether or not the topic is a worthwhile one and how it will be accepted. Oftentimes, students will try to answer these simple questions, see that their topic would not be a successful one, and ask for an extension to think of another topic. I grant this permission enthusiastically.

Writing What You [I] Yeach

I chose to write my textual analysis on "Shooting an Elephant," a popular essay written by George Orwell. I chose to write about this essay rather than anything from the Lunsford text because it deals with issues more deeply rooted in biased political viewpoints and the destruction of personal/private identity. I thought these issues went a little beyond some of the Lunsford pieces and would generate better, more fulfilling class discussion. I also had my class read the article before I presented my example/model of the often misunderstood assignment, so they would have a better understanding what I was talking about in the discussion--they needed to understand the connection between the essay's subject matter and the points I was making.

I'm an outliner, and I always have been. I read tables of content for fun. Therefore, I offer my experience in this particular drafting method to my students in hopes that it will at least help them generate and structure their papers with a little more ease. As many of you know, I also work at the MSU Writing Center, and of all the problems I come across, the most consistent is probably paragraphs that really have no meaning; students view writing a five-page paper as one whole, nearly-impossible task, which is much harder than logically breaking it down into predetermined points and sub points. Students have a very difficult time making concrete transitions from one topic to another if they view the paper as one whole chunk of information; this makes their research findings and criticisms harder to wade through, and nothing--from beginning to end--seems to connect. So, in my textual analysis, I made an outline: I said what I wanted to include in the intro, I included a concrete thesis statement that prompted the four points I wanted to make in my body (excluding a paragraph for summary), and I included room for a conclusion. I asked the students, after having read the article, to help me think of main ideas that should be addressed, and they had some great ideas that I had already included in my own outline and also some that I had looked over. Together, we created a great outline for the textual analysis, then I took that outline and wrote a draft.

Actually, I wrote three drafts, the second and third with only minor revisions necessary. The class was comforted by this project that we all "did together," and I think it gave them a sense of accomplishment and more self confidence.