One of my syllabus
assignments is adapted from Chen’s Editorial assignment he posted in his blog
(LINK). My adapted assignment has three parts: a written Op-Ed adapted to two
different papers, a reflective blog post, and a brief presentation. Part 1 of
this assignment reads as follows in my syllabus (although I’ll expand on this
in class):
You will identify a community issue or topic and write
an Op-Ed piece to submit to two different publications: the school newspaper
and a local newspaper. (I am flexible on this; if there is another paper you’d
like to write to, discuss it with me.) Your written Op-ed should follow the
guidelines established by each paper and consider the audience and gatekeepers
associated with each. Your two Op-Eds should NOT be identical.
I anticipate that students
may struggle to adapt their Op-Ed to two different sources. Some pieces of this
are obvious – different word count, perhaps different rules for grammar and
syntax – but I think writing to two separate audiences will be tricky. Most
likely, these students are used to writing for one audience: their teacher.
This assignment requires a level of rhetorical awareness within their own
writing and an awareness of the audience of each institution. When designing my
syllabus, I considered what I want my students to learn about through the
struggles of their Op-Eds:
· Audience awareness - based on significant research of
each institution (community and school newspaper), students must choose a topic
that can be adapted to either audience
· Gatekeepers – different from the primary audience but
necessary to appease in order to reach that audience
· Rhetorical choices within their own writing – applying
audience awareness in both choosing a topic and expressing an opinion on that
topic in a way that appeals to that audience
· Journalistic writing – as opposed to academic writing
In a sense, I’m setting my
students up to “fail” in this assignment when they submit to each publication
and are not all accepted. It’s cliché, but it’s a teaching moment – it will
give us an opportunity to review why those submissions weren’t accepted and to
revise their submissions accordingly for a chance at publication. Add
“Revision” to the above list!
What do y’all think? Is it a
good idea to include an assignment that encourages failure? Perhaps I would
revise this assignment to include online publications (which I’m only now
considering) – more students will have a chance to be published if they’re
submitting to different papers. I really like that this assignment allows us to
have conversations as a class about audience, gatekeepers, and the “medium is
the message” (print versus digital pubs). As-is, this assignment comes before
their rhetorical analysis, so I’m hoping that this assignment naturally leads
into analyzing audience and purpose in others’ writing. (Perhaps an informal
peer critique of the Op-Eds?) So many ideas for a class I don’t even have!
Hi there, Aubrey! Your question about an assignment that encourages failure interests me. I think it can be a good idea to include an assignment that encourages failure, as long as the students' inevitable failure doesn't ultimately sway their final grade too much. Many basic writers will already be discouraged enough in their work to have the assignment turned against them from the beginning. On the flip side, students who are used to completing the bare minimum to receive an A will have to step outside their realm of experience, which could prove to be quite beneficial. I think your assignment, like you said, would open up several potential discussions for your classroom that would serve your students well before writing a rhetorical analysis.
ReplyDeleteEmma, thanks for the comment! Students wouldn't lose any points if their paper wasn't accepted as an Op-Ed for publication. It's definitely a concern of mine that students would get down on themselves for "failing" if not published, but at the same time, I'd like to push them out of their comfort zones. Now Op-Eds, later conferences! ;)
DeleteHi Aubrey -- I'm so glad you found my assignment idea useful! I like your version of it, here. I appreciate how you break the assignment down to include a more "traditional" written component, a blog, and a verbal presentation. That'll give students a couple different ways to engage and develop their thinking.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciate your explicit highlighting of "gatekeepers" as part of the writer-audience equation (or rhetorical triangle) here. This is something I think about a lot in my own work as an editor and writer, but not something I've yet to really delve into with students. It's so important, though--who gets to say what information, what perspectives reach certain publics? Who has that institutional power? And how do writers negotiate that encounter with gatekeepers--sometimes, only through written communication? I've had lengthy back-and-forth email exchanges with editors--people I haven't met and may never meet. And I've been the editor on the other side of that fence, too. The rhetoric of the email exchange with a figure of authority!