For the purposes of teaching ENC 1101, I think us, as Instructors or GTAs, face the biggest challenge to the writing process: how do we get our students to give a damn? Sure, you can threaten them with the fact that their work will be graded, and that they need a C or above to pass the course otherwise they will be forced to sit through this “hell” again next semester. But what are we actually accomplishing in doing so? Are we inspiring them to consider and think about the issues that are important to them? Or are we simply forcing them to follow a formulaic method for writing an analytical paper?

I have to agree with Natalie in her discussion post, and Murray’s concept of 85% pre-writing. For beginning writers, the ART of writing must be explored, as well as the “formula.” On Monday I attempted to hold a class discussion on this very concept, in a field which I thought was applicable to my students: social media. However, rather than let themselves truly think about the topic at hand, they all tried to give me answers that they thought I would want to hear, which was, to say the least, counterproductive. In their minds, they are not writing these papers for themselves, or to reach some deeper level of meaning, but rather they are writing them for me, the “all-knowing authority figure.” And to be quite honest, I wouldn’t even know how to properly grade a paper with completely original thought yet riddled with structural, grammatical, and gasp! MLA errors. (Flashback to GTA orientation when a paper that was grammatically/structurally sound, yet not thought provoking received a higher grade than one with creative thought).

We can say we want papers with this type of originality, and that we should strive to teach our students this, but what rubric exists for grading an innovative thought process?