By Sarah Johnson, Assistant Senior Instructional Professor & Director of Undergraduate Studies in Laws, Letters, and Society and CCTL Associate Pedagogy Fellow
Every time I design a new course, I return to the most significant piece of advice that I received when I was getting ready to teach for the first time: that it is my job to prepare my students to succeed on the assignments I give them. When I first heard this, it struck me as an obvious responsibility but also one that I had hardly considered. I was a graduate student at the time who was about to teach a section of Classics of Social and Political Thought in the Social Sciences (SOSC) Core along with a political theory seminar of my own design. These were courses in which students would read books, talk about them, and then write about them. I realized, on reflection, that I had assumed that my students would simply learn by doing, or that with the opportunity to read, discuss, and write that I was giving them—and with some feedback from me along the way—they would leave my classes more adept at these tasks than they were when the classes began. I had thus intended to rely upon my students’ other teachers to shape them into the kinds of readers, interlocutors, and writers that I both needed and wanted them to be and had no concrete strategy for taking on that responsibility myself. What would effective teaching moments look like in the kinds of courses that I wanted to offer? I’ve spent the last fifteen years trying to answer this question, largely through experimentation in the classroom and by learning from my own teachers and colleagues.
Below I share an approach to designing writing assignments that came together when I was teaching full time in the SOSC Core as a Harper-Schmidt Fellow. It prepares students to succeed on their SOSC essays by breaking down the writing process into the essential steps that college-level writing demands and giving students time to attend to each one. The aim of scaffolding the writing process in this way is to help students not only to practice but also to learn the necessity and value of tasks such as exploratory writing, refining their ideas in conversation with others, and being mindful of their own development as writers (and thinkers). Using this assignment for the first essay of the quarter or year also helps me to clarify what I expect from my students each time they write a paper, even when some of the steps aren’t formally assigned. The ultimate goal of the assignment is to cultivate in my students a way of thinking about and approaching the writing process that will provide a foundation for further growth in other contexts.
Two Preparatory Assignments: Exploration and Framework
I give students their essay assignment about two and a half weeks before the deadline and structure this time to help them use it effectively. There are various ways of doing this. One approach that I learned from Kristen Brookes, a former colleague who teaches at the Amherst College Writing Center, is to give students an opportunity to use informal, exploratory writing to generate ideas for a paper immediately after receiving the assignment. Following Kristen’s model, I first ask my students to revisit the material they will be writing about and to copy down about five passages that they think can help them to answer the essay question. They bring these passages to our next class, where I give them time to hand-write in short bursts of three to five minutes in response to a series of prompts. After initially writing about their tentative argument for the paper, the students engage with each of their chosen passages in whatever way is most useful to them—for example, by explaining its meaning or why they think it will be useful, or by writing about any questions the passage inspires. As I learned from Kristen, what matters most in this exercise is that the students write constantly during their brief time with each prompt and resist the urge to criticize or edit what they have written. The point of an exercise like this is to get all their ideas onto the page without judgment. Once that is done, they can spend time reviewing what they have written to determine which ideas are more and less useful and revisit their plans for their paper.
My students then take advantage of the momentum generated by this initial exercise as they complete a second preparatory assignment that is due roughly twelve days before the essay deadline. The students’ task here is to transform their initial ideas into a framework for their paper. This framework includes a draft thesis-statement followed by a point-based outline, in which they write out the point of each paragraph in a complete sentence. As a final component of the framework assignment, I ask the students to provide a few pieces of textual evidence that can be analyzed to substantiate each point along with a brief discussion of why each passage will be helpful.
I saw Kristen make great use of pairing exploratory writing and point-based outline assignments at Amherst, but it was while training to be a lector for the Academic and Professional Writing course here at Chicago in graduate school that I first learned the value of teaching students to think about paragraphs in terms of points as opposed to topics or topic sentences. Whereas a topic sentence need only announce in broad terms what each paragraph will discuss, a paragraph’s point announces to the reader the reason why that paragraph exists at all. It is the specific step in the paper’s overarching argument that a given paragraph will develop and defend in order to develop and defend that larger argument successfully. Within a paragraph, then, the point carries the authority of a thesis: it governs everything that is written in it and helps the writer to determine what they must accomplish before moving on to the next paragraph. The framework assignment thus allows students to begin considering the moves they will need to make in their paper, the order in which those moves must be made, and the kinds of evidence and analysis that they might provide to execute those moves effectively. The assignment requires much of the reading and thinking effort that a full draft would require, but by producing just its essential components a student can more easily see the relationships among their thesis and their paragraphs and where things may have gone wrong as they worked up their argument.
Required Meeting: Feedback and Refining Ideas
I use these two preparatory assignments as the basis for a twenty-minute conversation with each student one week to ten days before the essay is due. The purpose of requiring students to meet with me at this stage is not only to provide verbal feedback on their framework assignment and to address questions and concerns about their developing paper. Its purpose is also to help students make the most of their discoveries from the preparatory assignments and to demonstrate the role of conversation in the refinement and generation of ideas.
For instance, when reviewing the framework assignment, I might see that a student’s points develop a different and stronger argument than is found in the thesis statement at the top of the page. In this case, I would use our conversation to explain the misalignment between the existing thesis and points, to show the student the insight that they reached through the process of working on their paper, and to brainstorm with the student what a thesis statement might look like that would do justice to their insight. Another student might plan to discuss an important concept in their paper without doing so in sufficient detail. Here I would ask the student to explain their understanding of the concept in order to draw out the knowledge they have about it that does not yet appear in their framework. We could then discuss how to incorporate that information into their paper.
Reflection: Opening a Conversation about Writing
Just as the required meeting offers students a chance to step back from their ideas in the middle of the writing process to reflect on the shape their paper is taking, I give students a way to take stock of their entire experience of writing the paper after they finish it. I want them to keep in mind that the paper they have written for me is part of their larger process of development as writers, a process that began long before they entered my classroom and one that will continue long after they leave. This means that when they write for me, they are drawing upon habits and skills that they learned by writing in other contexts while also cultivating new habits and skills that they can rely upon in future papers. Before submitting their final drafts, my students therefore prepare a 300- to 500-word reflection that helps them to understand their own writing process and to become more self-conscious about their development as writers. These reflections discuss 1) what they found most challenging about writing the essay; 2) something that they learned while writing it; 3) something that their essay does well; and 4) something that they could do to improve the essay. When they write their final paper of the quarter, I also ask them to discuss 5) how they have improved as a writer during the quarter; and 6) in what ways they would like to improve as a writer in future quarters.
Final Paper Comments: A Focus on Writing Development
The students’ reflections on their papers open a conversation about writing that I enter through my feedback. I typically begin my comments at the end of a paper by engaging with one of their own observations about their writing process. For example, students often report that their argument underwent significant changes between the time they began outlining and drafting their paper and when they submitted it. Some will take from this experience the insight that they need to try to give themselves more time than they typically do to write their papers as these transformations, although frustrating, ultimately made their final draft much better than it would have otherwise been. In response to an observation like this, I might explain that this is indeed an indispensable part of the writing process and that building in more time for these discoveries and revisions will help them to write at an even higher level. But some students will draw a different conclusion from the same experience, namely that they did something wrong because they did not begin writing with the best possible argument in mind. Their goal in future essays is usually to develop a better plan for their papers in advance so that they can avoid friction and uncertainty in the drafting process. In these cases, I would caution them against this aspiration by explaining that we typically only find the best arguments we can make through the process of writing itself, and that the evolution of their own argument demonstrates that they did exactly what they were supposed to do during the writing process.
In the rest of my comments, I discuss two or three writing issues that I want the student to try to address in their next paper. I number these discussions and place corresponding numbers in the margins of the essay to show the student where each problem occurred. Over the years, these numbers have become the only margin notes I make on essays, an approach that I remember one of my own professors, Aryeh Kosman, using when I was in college. I have discovered that providing feedback in this way allows me to focus the student’s attention on making the improvements that I think will have the greatest impact on the next paper they write, whether that paper is written for me or another instructor. And by addressing these at the end of the paper, I give myself the space both to explain why the issues I identified are indeed problems and to provide concrete suggestions for how to avoid them in the future. In doing so, I often draw upon my training for Academic and Professional Writing, where I was taught to rewrite sentences for my students in order to show them how the feedback I was offering could be put to use and the difference that it would make to their writing.
Although this kind of feedback necessarily emphasizes problems at the level of writing over problems at the level of textual interpretation, this does not mean that I ignore the claims my students make about the texts we are studying. Rather, it means that what I say about a student’s interpretation will be in the service of helping them to do a better job on their next paper, which is unlikely to be on the same text and will often be in another course altogether. For example, students often attribute ideas to an author that I don’t think can be supported by the text at all, and certainly not by the parts of it that they quoted or cited as evidence. When this happens, I might explain why I don’t think they can use a particular passage as evidence for their claim, offer a few examples of claims that the passage could in fact support, and explain the difference between these claims and the student’s. My aim in doing this would be to help the student to become a more careful reader by giving them tools that can help them to scrutinize their textual evidence during the drafting process.
Final Thoughts
While this specific approach to scaffolding writing assignments can help students to succeed on their SOSC essays, the principle that underlies it—breaking down a writing process into its essential components—can also guide the design of writing assignments in upper-level undergraduate courses. It has helped me, for example, when designing research assignments for my courses in the Law, Letters, and Society program. I ask myself what students would have to accomplish throughout the quarter to succeed on their projects and turn these expected milestones into guided assignments that provide an opportunity for feedback. No matter the level of the course, then, I aim to avoid assuming that my students already know the motions that I expect them to go through to complete an assignment and instead build those into the course itself.
Sarah Johnson is Assistant Senior Instructional Professor and Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Law, Letters, and Society (LLSO) Program. Her current research focuses on the coevolution of Karl Marx’s ideas about history, critique, and political economy in the 1840s. In addition to teaching courses on political economy in LLSO, she regularly teaches in the Classics of Social and Political Thought Core sequence.