Abandoning Basic Writing: A New Model

Rodby, Judith, and Tom Fox. "Basic Work and Material Acts: The Ironies, Discrepancies, 
and Disjunctures of Basic Writing and Mainstreaming." Journal of Basic Writing 19.1 
(2000): 84-98. Web. 4 Feb. 2013.

Rodby and Fox’ main arguments are that students learn to do college writing by being in college writing courses (rather than basic writing courses) and that learning to write is not a discrete skill but a practice (84). The authors begin by framing what they see as the inherent ironies of basic writing and note the political motives they see as creating this inequality (84-85). Basic writing, write Rodby and Fox, discourages students because students do not earn credits for the courses. In addition, the authors also challenge the assumption that writing simple modes prepares students for college work (85-86). In a sense, they’re saying that basic writing courses breed basic writers (86). Instead, students can rise to the level of college writing if they are situated in that context: “...context powerfully affects what writers do” (87). At Cal State Chico, basic writing disappeared with little fanfare and students who would have originally placed into basic writing courses were placed into college courses with a separate adjunct writing workshop (88). One dilemma the authors note is that ESL students are often placed in basic writing courses although they argue that ESL is a distinctly different area that does not determine basic writing level (90). In adjunct workshops, students have the opportunity to mingle with other writers outside the context of their own composition classroom. They are more free to struggle and work through ideas in an atmosphere where they are not being graded by their composition instructor. It creates a collaborative atmosphere where students direct the workshop and model writing for each other (91-96).  The authors “have abandoned the notion that we can teach writing in any generic sense” (91).

I agree that ESL students should not automatically be placed as basic writers. However, I think their statement should acknowledge the complexities of cultural differences about writing. In my experience, this is somewhat western and some students struggle with concepts like thesis or authorship.

What intrigued me in particular was the way Cal State Chico ran their workshops. At my institution, writing labs are distinctly connected with the courses and taught by the same instructors.

Rodby and Fox state that the traditional composition class denies students of their agency and that the adjunct writing workshops allow students to take that back in a different atmosphere. I hope that most composition courses actually give students agency, but I can see how this is problematic and think we should consider other models.

Finally, my experience in assessment also demonstrates that writing courses do not necessarily teach skills that transfer from one course to the next. My committee work assesses both courses in our comp sequence and we actually observed a drop in scores between the two.

I would recommend this article to my peers who teach composition with additional writing instruction. The notion that basic writing is inherently problematic is something I want to continue to explore as I read and connect ideas about supplementary instruction for composition courses.