William Riley Parker and Albert R. Kitzhaber have something in common - they both feel that the way we teach English composition, and university English departments in general, need an overhaul. Where they differ is that Parker bases his ideas on the past, while Kitzhaber is more forward thinking. Though both men assess the situation from a specific point of view, Parker spends a great deal of time lamenting that we have forgotten our roots, while Kitzhaber focuses more on productive possibilities for change. Kitzhaber's blow by blow analysis of the English department situation is relevant even today, which could be a bit discouraging since this reinforces his prediction that the need for radical and sweeping reforms may continue to be ignored. However, after detailing the main issues in college and university English departments across the nation, such as, "confusion in purpose, content, and organization; inexpert teaching; poor textbooks," his analysis of what is wrong with the way English composition is being taught automatically provides us with possible solutions for these problems.
Overall, Parker leaves us with a feeling of chastisement and a sense of hopelessness, yet Kitzhaber provides us with a productive analysis and something to consider as we become integrated into the decision making process in our respective English departments. From how we choose to teach our own classes, to our willingness to try new teaching techniques, we can be an influence for positive change in the way English composition is taught and how our departments are run. To do so, we must acknowledge our past, but continue looking toward the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment