My Philosophy of Teaching Composition

Teaching Philosophy Statement

Making connections is at the core of my teaching philosophy.  I believe that the learning experience is greatly enhanced when:

   1)  Students can make connections to the tools and topics being introduced to them.

   2)  Students can make connections to their fellow students, their community and the world around them. 

♬ Teaching Philosophy  ♫

Since I teach chemistry, biochemistry and biotechnology, I decided to do a little research related to teaching college writing composition before addressing this blog topic.  I explored various resources including syllabi and curriculum associated with a first year composition course as well as Richard Fulkerson’s Four Philosophies of College Composition.  I used simple search engine phrases such as ‘teaching composition’ to retrieve a collection of works related to the subject.  The search results included not only writing composition, but also several sources related to music composition.  At first, I spent some time revising my search phrases so as to narrow the results, but then it occurred to me that music was the perfect analogy for describing my teaching philosophy and teaching style.

Consider any musical composition.  Nearly all pianos have the same eighty-eight keys.  That means that every song, melody or jingle is just a different combination of connecting those keys.  And the possible new combinations are limitless.  Some people have a natural gift when it comes to connecting the keys, but that gift can be nurtured if they are exposed to other compositions or musical instruments.  Other individuals require more rigid instructional methods and theory in order to understand the outcome of their composition or how it will be received/perceived. 

Students in writing composition are essentially presented with the twenty-six letters of the alphabet.  From this, they must compose a broad range of written materials.  It is my goal to show students some ways in which they can use the tools presented to them without limiting what they do with those tools.  Spelling and punctuation in written composition are important because they help to deliver the message, but they are by no means the only tools.  In fact, the tools associated with composition have evolved as technology has evolved.  Spell-check tools in word processing software programs are typically automatically invoked to help guide the spelling correctness of a composition just as Auto-Tune (Antares Technologies) is a software program that can be used to correct for pitch ‘inaccuracies’ in voice and instrument recordings.

In order for me, as a teacher, to even begin to help students connect to the tools available to them, I must continue to learn about the new technologies as they develop.  This doesn’t mean that I need to be an expert in using the technology.  In fact, it is quite the contrary.  I would rather introduce the tools to students and have them show me what they are able to do with it.  Furthermore, the various topics of technology can be a way to connect students directly to the material.  For example, some writing composition students may already use Auto-tune or other software or gaming as a hobby.  Having students write about their experience with that technology is a way to bridge the subject of composition with a topic of interest.

Students can bring their own individual experiences to an instructional setting and deliver beautiful and meaningful messages much like a solo performer would.  But if you take a solo pianist, add some string, horns and percussion, you get an orchestra where everyone is making a contribution.  This becomes an experience for all of the musicians as well as anyone within listening distance.  The same can be said of the writing experience.  I believe that collaborative writing and review can help students see how writing connects them to others and the world around them.

Using Fulkerson’s classifications, my teaching philosophy can be broadly defined as expressive.  In fact, I do “desire to have writing contain an interesting, credible, honest and personal voice” (Fulkerson, 1979).  But I think there are also elements of the formalist, mimetic and rhetorical philosophies all interwoven into my teaching style.   The rules adhered to in the formalist approach must be taught so that a composition makes sense or can communicate to the reader.  This leads to my adoption of the rhetorical philosophy.  Namely, “good writing is writing adapted to achieve the desired effect on the desired audience” (Fulkerson, p. 346).  Finally, the mimetic philosophy is supported by my desire to have students connect to the topic by their understanding of the topic.  This may require research on the student’s part in order to gain an understanding of the topic.

Berlin discusses expressionist textbooks and how most “emphasize the use of metaphor either directly or by implication” or how they “specifically recommend the cultivation of the ability to make analogies” (Berlin, 1982).  And again, upon reflection, I certainly see myself in this description.  As an ‘expressionist’ and a scientist, I found Flower and Hayes’ protocol analysis of writers in action extremely informative (Flower, 1981) and the resulting writing process, with it’s de-emphasis on the timing or linearity of that process aligned well with my teaching philosophy.

While I posted this teaching philosophy with respect to composition, it is in fact the same philosophy I ascribe to in my science classes.  And if you were thinking that a scientist is more of a formalist than an expressivist, I would respond by saying that science is art and the living world is a composition.  After all, nearly all living things are made up of only six elements (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorous and sulfur) from the periodic table.  It is the limitless connection of these elements to each other that provides nature with its harmonious diversity.

Berlin, James A. (1982).  Contemporary Composition The Major Pedagogical Theories in Cross-Talk in Comp Theory A Reader.

Flower, Linda and John R Hayes (1981).  A Cognitive process Theory of Writing in Cross-Talk in Comp Theory A Reader.

Fulkerson, Richard (1979).  Four Philosophies of Composition, College Composition and Communication, 30(4):  343-348.