I was never really interested in writing when I was a primary or secondary education student. Usually the writing was forced, busy work, hand cramping or just plain boring. I never saw writing having an exploratory nature, before this course. My new goals as a writer are to write in a more exploratory nature. Just because it is academic or thesis driven, it does not mean that my writing cannot be exploratory in nature. Historical writing is an exploration of sources through questions. In a DEN, I responded to a Standford political science professor, Richard Fagen, who Bean quoted as being frustrated with the “constraints of the language of academic social sciences,” (53) by wrestling with the idea that academic writing does not have to stifle writers. Instead writers should use the exploratory nature of their craft to create passion in the writing. To this aim, I wish to be able to write in a more coherent and less densely clouded vocabulary. In my writing museum, I chose to bring in James Loewen’s Lies My Teacher Told Me, because “the writing is easy to access” and “I prefer authors who write to an audience much wider than academia” (Museum Object Card). I have come to realize this is my goal in writing, since I tend not to write in non-academic language. On some levels, I probably aim to be James Loewen, a widely accessible and read history educator. This is especially true of my writing.
The “6 Things About Me” writing project forced me to write about myself. I am usually completely uncomfortable writing about myself, especially if the audience is anyone besides myself. So, knowing that the audience for this piece would be the rest of the class or anyone who happens upon my blog page was crippling at first. Yet, through drafting and sharing in the small groups, I began to gain confidence and an understanding of writing as an exploration of myself. I ended up seriously thinking, what do I want people to know about me? The six things I wrote about seemed to flow from there. Also, I was battling with the idea of beginning my “About Me” with the fact that I am married. I even asked my peer editing group, James, Kristina and Matt, if it was awful to start off my writing with that introduction. Was it antifeminist or self-conscious to start with my connection to my husband? The feedback I got was all for that introduction, since the most important part of that blurb was the phase “I am still learning.” This was really the whole point of that section because it was about how I am always learning even if it is not something in my content area. Also, I think this section is an important connection piece with students who are interested in continuing learning and trade occupations. Since the intended audience for this piece is my future students, it is important to show students there are many paths to take outside of school from college to trades.
Next, the profile I did of Matt Clegg, was an interesting experience for me. As a history student, I am used to writing about long ago events or people. If the people I write about are still alive, there is a very minimal chance I will ever interact with them in person. Thus, it was refreshing to be able to write about someone and have them look what I wrote. I was most concerned with representing Matt as true as I could from the notes I took during the interview. I began to see a theme in his studies, activities and even his museum exhibition. This theme was nature and the exploration of the natural world through literature or national parks. I am a big fan of national parks and transcendentalists, so I wonder if my enthusiasm ended up being reflected in his profile. Also, I think this writing prompt could be incorporated into Social Studies classes. Although the students will not have a person from the past to physically interview, the students could role-play or write a profile based on historical interviews. Also, I think this writing exercise can be used as an introduction into oral history. This is a section of historical research and writing that is based on interviewing people about their past. I think I can have students interview each other in class to model questions or how interviews work. Then, the students will interview a parent or relative about a specific event or era of history the relative was alive for. After the relative interviews, the students would write up a profile on the relative and a short piece on their relatives’ stories.
The op-ed I wrote originally started out from a conversation I had in a Conversational English class in Uzhhorod, Ukraine. I was at an English school there, teaching art to 8-13 year olds and English to adult students at night, when my husband and I were invited to the Conversational class. They students wanted to converse with native speakers of English, but their questions ended up focused on Donald Trump and our opinions on his presidency. I was asked about my opinions of Mexican immigrants because they had heard that he called Mexicans criminals. The discussion ended up turning into a connecting point between Ukrainians and Americans. The Ukrainians are currently involved with an issue of Russian migrants from the Soviet Era living in the western side of Ukraine, which has sparked a war. Although Mexicans and Americans are not at war with each other, we do tend to bicker about who is allowed in our countries, even though people have been migrating in and out of our country for hundreds of years. I thought this would be an interesting thing to explore. I never brought up the Ukraine connection in the piece, since I felt I already had a personal example of how citizenship has been affected by migration. I am referring the section about my ancestors and their migration into America. I wanted to keep the focus of the essay around the North American continent, and specifically U.S. immigration and citizenship policy. I felt like the repeal of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), created an urgency for a discussion like the one I had in Ukraine.
The first draft of my op-ed piece was a mess. Vincent and James helped me hone in on the focus of my essay. I tend to pack in a ton of information with an academic vocabulary, which makes my writing hard to read due to density. I was going from civic duty to the definition of citizenship to the issue of immigration. Vincent told me I needed to figure out which one was most important to me and the editing/focusing would come from there. When I worked with Matt the focus had become defining citizenship with the urgent issue of DACA children in mind. These multiple peer edits showed me the real power of in class editing. I have always been a fan of planning for peer group editing of essays. Yet, I realized that I should plan more for more opportunities for peer editing than just the day before the writing assignment is due. Knowing that multiple readers can cause you to create multiple drafts, I need to plan this into my units if I plan to assign any type of writing assessment. I think this can be strategically laid out over the course of the unit through writing in to the days, exit slips and DENs. These small writing practices can lead to big picture thinking. Then, students can use these writing practices to begin drafting. Throughout the drafting process the students will be given peer feedback. I would start this feedback on a paragraph by paragraph level at the beginning of the year and transition to full draft editing workshops by the end of the year.