Evaluate Instructional Practices

In this analysis, I discuss how my ENG 484 coursework helped me assess the effectiveness of my mentoring strategies.

I owe much of my teaching improvement to my ENG 484 coursework, where I had the opportunity to study teaching pedagogy. 

Studying different pedagogies helped me to evaluate my own strengths and weaknesses as Writing Mentor, and it also created a starting point for modifying my instructional practices.

For example, one area I focused on modifying was the type of writing feedback I provided.

As a new Writing Mentor — even though I taught about larger composition concepts in a group classroom setting — my instinct was often to highlight tiny grammatical errors in my individual writing feedback. There was a disconnect between my group teaching and individual mentoring. However, the more I studied different teaching theories, the more I began to focus my individual feedback on the content of the writing. Rather than point out missing commas, I began to help students see how to improve the voice, logical structure, rhetorical awareness, and more in their individual writing projects.

Example Classroom Teaching Resource:

"What is a Rhetorical Analysis?"

Valerie Balester, in her "How Writing Rubrics Fail: Toward a Multicultural Model" article, explains that we often fall into the trap of overemphasizing grammar to the point that we can ignore larger points such as audience or purpose. She rallies for instructors to create grading rubrics that help them judge "the whole rhetorical situation." In this view, grammar is not ignored, but it is instead seen as a rhetorical device.

Similarly, in his "The Myth of Linguistic Homogeneity in U.S. Composition," Paul K. Matsuda explains how learners are at a disadvantage if "language issues beyond simple 'grammar' correction are not addressed extensively." Matsuda focuses on the non-native English speakers' experience and warns that — if second-language learners are primarily receiving critiques on grammar when the larger goal of the course is another writing concept like argumentation — they are at a clear disadvantage.

In my first class, I worked with a second-language learner whose grammatical errors popped out angrily on each page. I must admit, my first reaction to reading her work was to focus on syntax alone.

However, as I read more teaching theory, I realized that grammar should not be the primary focus. I instead started to primarily give her feedback on the actual content of her writing.

This new focus brought real, positive change: rather providing a rushed band-aid fix to her grammar (which the 7.5-week course was not designed to teach), I saw great improvement in her logical and persuasive writing skills. I also noticed this student gaining more confidence and comfort with writing as the session progressed. If I had stuck to detail-oriented grammar points, she would have missed out on the course's primary learning objectives. 

In courses like ENG 101 and ENG 102, where the goal is to improve student writing as a whole, it doesn't make sense to specialize comments on grammar. Students ultimately learn more with a content-first feedback approach, and I plan to keep it a primary focus in future composition classes.