Re: if you only had 75 minutes

[WILL HOCHMAN <hochman@uscolo.edu>]

nick, I know that students often confuse learning rhetorical patterns with
synthesizing them.  A problem in academic life is that if I teach Elbow's
approach (for example) and drop classical rhetorical terms as goals, I
think I'm not preparing students for being savvy when asked to compare,
define, argue, etc., in other classes...my answer is to teach classic
rhetorical patterns and to stress creativity and synthesis of them...my
metaphor is that I'm helping to create a quiver of writing arrows which
allows students to think of themselves as having a variety of writing
skills and resources...my guess between the lines of your post is that you
have found ways around "classic" rhetorical approaches...am I misreading
your white space? will

On Sun, 2 Nov 1997, Nick Carbone wrote:

>  
> Hi Will,
> 	I've got a copy of Booth's book, have had it for years, picked up
> as an undergrad. at a used bookstore.  I've never gotten around to reading
> it though.  However, as I wrote about the excerise, and as I've used it,
> it occurred to me that I should read it because I stumbled into the
> exercise from thinking about the title, "The Rhetoric of Fiction."
> 	I've also reverse taught those rhetorical elements by
> asking students to read classmates' essays and to identify the same
> things: comparisons, contrasts, narratives, and so on.  I remember my
> first year writing course at the Univ. of Hartford in 1977, where we did a
> paper for each type.  I thought all papers had to be one or the other for
> years, and didn't want my students to walk away with that
> misunderstanding. Sure they could be, but they don't have to be.  Besides,
> students are pleasantly surprised to see how much they do that is already
> 'classical,' to hint at Corbett's title.
> 
> Nick Carbone, Writing Instructor
> Marlboro College
> Marlboro, VT 05344
> nickc@marlboro.edu, but coming to you via nickc@english.umass.edu
> 
> 
>