The Stentor

The debate over changes to the college's First Year Studies program is the most prominent discussion about the academic curriculum this semester.  Some members of the faculty hope to expand the program to a two-credit class offered over two semesters or combined into a more intense single semester class.  The essay yields two prospects: 1) improving retention and 2) teaching more writing to first year students.

Faculty and students convey a few convincing arguments against this proposition.  First, students and faculty discourage the restriction that a compulsory, two-credit course places upon students.  At a liberal arts college, a student should have ability to choose his or her classes according to his or her own interests.  Second, students question the sudden emphasis on writing; many wonder why writing over math or critical thinking should be stressed in a first year class. 

Third, some faculty members are concerned with their ability to sufficiently teach first year writing and with their dedication to teaching the tedious aspects of first year writing.  Of course, many great writers who can teach significant aspects of writing or more advanced writing exist in the faculty, but few of them have been taught how to teach early college writing.  Hence, should faculty who do not typically teach first year writing be discouraged from teaching First Year Studies because of this deficiency or disinterest? I discourage all of these arguments because writing, in all forms, is an essential aspect of education and academia; hence, I arduously support the change to the First Year Studies program and its new focus on writing.

Students should not have a choice to obviate writing in their first year of college. In the September issue of "Harper's Magazine," Mark Soulka wrote an article called, "Dehumanized." In this article, he made a few important arguments about writing.  He notes that writing promotes and develops clear and concise thinking and that clear writing is an expression of clear thinking (the kind of thinking that is necessary for a college student).  Furthermore, he mentions Brent Staples' editorial that discusses the necessity for clear writers in the business world; so, in addition to being academically significant, writing is pragmatically significant. 

Lastly, he argues that writing promotes democracy, for it enables a student to clarify problems and partake in major intellectual discourse (writing here is thus distinguished from math and critical thinking). Hence, to supply students with the necessary ability of clear and distinct discourse, writing should be a mandatory first year practice - one that supersedes math and critical thinking.

As for the argument against forcing faculty to teach writing, there is a new solution to this problem.  I agree that this is a genuine concern.  Nevertheless, Dawn Apt-Perkins and the Writing Center developed a pilot for the Writing Assistants Program. This program hopes to train student writers in teaching first year writing. These assistants will be available to come to a first year studies class and help the professor teach the tedious issues that all first year students have with writing. While this program remains preliminary and still unstructured, it appears to have a fruitful future that will come with resources - money - and the dedication of interested students and faculty.

But this debate will continue. If you haven't heard, the discussion about changing the First Year Studies program has been postponed.  Next year, First Year Studies classes will persist as usual.  There is, however, one significant change; next fall, there will be no English 100; the class will only be offered in the spring.  This change was made for many reasons but the most apparent is moderation: FIYS teaches writing - remember it fulfills the first year writing requirement - and first year students took this course with English 100 in the Fall. 

Hence, after students took these courses, they entered the spring semester with no significant writing assignments. Now, however, first year students will have challenging writing courses offered throughout the entire year. This change yields a hopeful prospect of expanding the breadth of Lake Forest College's writing program.  

This change is a constructive one because next semester, Lake Forest College is being reviewed for its writing program. We, as a college, need augmentations and changes like these, for we do not have the most developed writing program.  We have First Year Studies, but not every class focuses on writing.  We also have the First Year and All School writing contests, but these are not yet popular.  "Eukaryon," the college's science journal, promotes and advertises good scientific writing, but we lack a journal of undergraduate writing for all disciplines.      

I am not entirely suggesting that the college work towards adding new writing classes or rearrange whole departments and programs to focus on writing. Yes, I do support the First Year Studies change because all students need a basis in college writing. Although I had a First Year Studies class that focused on writing, I still had to get down and dirty with Elements of Style and Diana Hacker. I wish that I had learned more writing in class - not just basic elements of writing (students could do this on their own time). While some classes teach or assist students with more advanced writing, not all students take these classes. Lake Forest College students need more support with advanced writing.

Before we suggest any of these changes, however, we need to make writing seem cool, or, better yet, we need to show students that writing is cool. I need more examples of public writing that are totally awesome to motivate me, as a student, to pursue higher academic standards and styles of writing.

In other words, besides supporting a development of writing programs, I fully support the advertisement of writing: the transformation of mundane writing into rad writing.

Article Tools