ENGL 722-01: Approaches to Teaching Writing
Randy Bass Fall 2007
Mondays 6:05 to 8:05
Course Description:
This course will explore the theory and practice of teaching writing (and to a lesser extent
literature), with an emphasis on developing the conceptual contexts for creating effective
pedagogical designs. Some of these conceptual contexts include knowledge of learning
theory and research on expert thinking, theory and practice of cultural and critical
literacies (including visual and digital literacies), theory and practice of reading and
approaches to bridging reading and writing, and the history and range of approaches to
teaching composition and rhetoric. The course is divided into three units or themed
cycles, each of which will include a range of critical readings, examinations of sample
student writing and assignment sequences, and the creation and peer critique of draft
assignments and curricular designs. The three units are built respectively around three
key ideas: Difficulty – what are we trying to accomplish when we teach writing;
expertise—how does knowledge about expert thinking and learning development shape
the ways we imagine the unfolding of the writing process in the classroom; and literacy –
what are the larger social, cultural and critical contexts of literacy that shape how we
design writing instruction for any given learning context.
Each cycle will include the creation of a fully annotated and justified assignment
sequence for use in a course. By the end of the course, these three assignment sequences
will form the core of the final project, which is to be a fully conceptualized course
syllabus with framing rationale and design notes. Collectively, the class will edit and
“bind” the course syllabi into a shared volume with short themed connecting essays and a
communally-produced annotated bibliography. In addition to the assignments and syllabi,
students will also carry out a mini- case study/ethnography of a classroom (at
Georgetown or elsewhere).
Readings for the course include essays and books by contemporary educators, scholars of
rhetoric and composition, and learning researchers and education theorists. Authors
include Bartholomae, Bereiter and Scardamalia, Blau, Flower & Hayes, Delpit, Graff,
McCormick, Salvatori, Shaughnessy, Min Shan Lu, Slevin, Yancey, Linkon,Wineburg,
and others. Written class assignments and class discussion will focus on teaching,
learning, and curriculum development, with particular attention to the integration of
reading and writing in applied classroom contexts. Students will have the opportunity to
develop projects in line with their interests, such as teaching in higher education, K-12
education, community-based teaching, and digital and multimedia literacies. The course
will be run as a seminar with substantial time spent in working groups for discussion and
engaging in critical feedback and peer review of one another’s developed materials.
Students in the course will also have responsibility for making many of the decisions
about the shape of the final project volume as well as some other related course activities.
1
Course Goals: After taking this course, students should be able to
1. Distrust traditional approaches to teaching reading and writing and to be able to
articulate alternative approaches and their rationale; demonstrate an ability to
make use of (and reference) a repertoire of ideas, models, and resources in the
conception and design of writing-intensive pedagogies.
2. Demonstrate facility with some foundational concepts for thinking about
pedagogical design; develop and articulate assumptions about course and
sequence design; demonstrate an ability to apply those assumptions through the
design and description of course-based pedagogies (specifically a sequence or
progression)
3. Demonstrate an ability to be cognizant of, and design for, the novice student
experience of reading and writing in literature/humanities contexts; demonstrate
an ability to articulate intellectual content to be taught within a framework of
developmental learning, that moves from difficulty to complexity, and bridges
novice with expert learning processes
4. Demonstrate an ability to imagine the ways that a developmental approach to
intellectual content might shape a whole course; address issues of alignment of
goals, activities, and criteria for assessment through course and assignment design
5. Articulate and apply an expanded notion of literacy beyond traditional print and
verbal writing in sequence and assessment design.
Unit Questions
Assignment Emphases
What are we trying to accomplish when
Unit I:
Difficulty we’re teaching writing? How is writing a
Design an assignment
sequence that addresses the
idea of difficulty in both
reading and writing, and builds
from the difficulty of reading
to the writing process.
What might it mean to teach writing in the
Unit II:
Expertise context of student intellectual
Design an assignment
sequence that emphasizes
dimensions of learning in
some developmental way,
including the role of revision
as a way to focus on particular
developmental areas. This
assignment sequence will
include a tentative rubric for
assessment.
mode of thought and a form of intellectual
work? How are writing and reading
interdependent? How might the idea of
difficulty be an entry point to the teaching
of writing? What might it mean to design
for difficulty?
development? What do we know about
learning (cognitive and otherwise) that can
be applied to the teaching of writing as an
unfolding process? What do we know
about expert learning and expert thinking
processes that can be applied to writing
instruction?
2
Unit III:
Literacy
What is the relationship between writing
and literacy? What roles do class and
culture play in the design and ideology of
writing instruction in universities and other
settings? Should multiple literacies be the
focus of writing instruction? What are the
salient literacies of the 21st century? What
difference does it make whether English
(or humanities) departments teach writing?
Is there a disciplinary basis to writing?
What does it mean for a theory of literacy
to govern a course in writing?
Design a new unit assignment,
or build on an earlier one, that
deliberately takes up the
question of multiple literacies.
How do considerations of
different media and literacies
shape the ways you conceive
of writing and intellectual
development? What impact do
considerations of culture and
class have on pedagogical
designs, assessment, etc.?
Books ordered for the Course:
James Slevin, Introducing English: Essays in the Intellectual Work of Composition
Sheridan Blau, The Literature Workshop: Teaching Texts and their Readers
Edward Corbett, Nancy Myers, and Gary Tate, eds. The Writing Teacher’s Sourcebook
Mariolina Salvatori and Patricia Donohue, The Elements (and Pleasures) of Difficulty
Other readings in electronic and printed form.
Course Work/ Assignments
(1) Weekly postings to blog and wiki: Participate weekly in writing reflections,
descriptions of your unit/assignment/syllabus development, and contributions of
sources and bibliography. Postings to the blog or wiki will always be in
connection with other assignments, both to advance your thinking and sharing
ideas publicly for the common good.
(2) Case Study / Ethnography of Learning: Observation/description of teaching
practice and student learning, either GU or elsewhere. The case study consists of a
minimum of two class session observations and a one-hour interview of the
faculty member. Depending on interests and circumstances “observation” might
include reading weblog entries or discussion board postings, sitting in on writing
workshops, etc. Students are welcome to arrange for their own case classrooms;
we will match people with GU faculty and other placements as needed.
(3) Two developed and annotated assignment sequences: These will vary in length
and depth depending on where we are in the course. They will be, in revised form,
the core of your final project.
(4) Final Project—Full Course Syllabus: Syllabus includes two to three fully
annotated and justified assignment sequences, with overall statement of
intellectual and pedagogical rationale.
(5) Contributions to the editing of the course volume: This is a bound (in some
form) collection of all the course syllabi and narratives.
3
Readings and Topics Schedule (outline) :
UNIT I: DIFFICULTY
Readings:
 James Slevin, Introducing English, Prologue and Chapter 1
 Salvatori and Donahue, The Elements (and Pleasures) of Difficulty (all)
 Peter Elbow, “Embracing Contraries in the Teaching Process” (Sourcebook)
 Sheridan Blau, The Literature Workshop, Introduction, Chs 1, 7, and 8
 Bauer, Dale, “Another F Word in the Classroom: Failure”
 John Bean, “How Writing is Related to Critical Thinking” (handout)
 Richard Fulkerson, “Composition at the Turn of the 21st Century” (handout)
 “Constructing Effective Writing Assignments,” from Strategies for Teaching
First-Year Composition, eds. Roen, Pontoja, Yena, Miller, and Waggoner.
(handout)
8/29: Difficulty I
Introduction and overview. The intellectual work of English Studies and Composition,
the idea of difficulty, and the problem of learning.
9/10: Difficulty II
Group introductions. Training on Class Blog. Posting to Blog on “difficulty.”
Readings:
Slevin, Prologue and Chapter 1;
Salvatori and Donahue, read all intro material (through 14) and Ch 7—then read
at least the couple of ch’s 2, 3, 5, and 6 that interest you most (if not all of them).
9/17: Difficulty III
Readings:
Draft assignment sequences due by 9/20.
Discussion of readings on assignment sequences and design
The Classroom as Intersection of Theory and Practice
Readings:
Blau, Intro, Ch 1, 7 and 8
Jones, “Thinking Critically about Digital Literacy”
“Constructing effective writing assignments”
9/24: Difficulty IV
Peer Group Critique of assignment sequence drafts .Come prepared with group
drafts critiqued.
Readings:
Bean, “How Writing is Related to Critical Thinking”
Bauer, Dale, “Another F Word in the Classroom: Failure”
Elbow, “Embracing Contraries”
4
Fulkerson, “Composition at the turn of the 21st Century”
PREPARING FOR CASE STUDIES
10/1: Classroom Observation/Case Study Preparation
Come with draft interview protocol and/ or case reports
 Lee Shulman, "Just in Case: Reflections on Learning from Experience" (handout)
 Online cases studies at:
http://quest.carnegiefoundation.org/~dpointer/gallery/index.htm
UNIT II: EXPERTISE
Readings:
 Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts, chaps 3.
 Nancy Sommers and Laura Salz, “The Novice as Expert: Writing in the Freshman
Year”; “The Revision Strategies of Beginning and Adult Writers”; “Responding
to Student Writing”
 David Bartholomae, “The Study of Error”; “Inventing the University”
 James Slevin, from Introducing English, “Academic and Student Genres: Toward
a Poetics of Composition,” “Genre as a Social Institution,”
 Assignment excerpts from Ways of Reading, and other resources
 Essays from Local Knowledge, Local Practices: Writing within the Disciplines at
Cornell, ed. Jonathon Monroe:
o Jane Fajans (Anthropology) “Exoticizing the Familiar: Familiarizing the
Exotic”
o Kathryn March (Anthopology, Women’s Studies, Asian Studies), “Writing
from (Field) Experience”
o Jennifer Whiting (Philosophy), “Cultivating Dialectical Imagination”
o Michael Macy (Sociology) “Writing as a Sociologist”
 Dennis Lynch, Diana George and Marilyn Cooper, “Moments of Argument:
Agonistic Inquiry and Confrontational Cooperation” (Handout)
10/8: Expertise I—Problem of Academic Discourse
Expert learning and its applications to writing and reading
Readings and Discussion
o David Bartholomae, “Inventing the University” (print handout)
o James Slevin, from Introducing English, Chaps 7 & 8: “Academic and
Student Genres: Toward a Poetics of Composition,” “Genre as a Social
Institution,”
o NYU, University Writing Syllabus (“Progressions”) (handout from two weeks
ago) (blog)
5
10/15: Expertise II—Disciplinary Thinking, College Writing, and Student Development
Readings and discussion.
 Nancy Sommers and Laura Salz, “The Novice as Expert: Writing in the
Freshman Year” (Blackboard)
 Essays from Local Knowledge, Local Practices: Writing within the
Disciplines at Cornell, ed. Jonathon Monroe: (Blog)
o Jane Fajans (Anthropology) “Exoticizing the Familiar: Familiarizing the
Exotic”
o Kathryn March (Anthopology, Women’s Studies, Asian Studies), “Writing
from (Field) Experience”
o Jennifer Whiting (Philosophy), “Cultivating Dialectical Imagination”
Michael Macy (Sociology) “Writing as a Sociologist”

OPTIONAL/RECOMMENDED: Wineburg, Historical Thinking and Other
Unnatural Acts, chaps 3 (blog)
10/22: Expertise III—Expertise, Student Intellectual Development, and the Writing
Process
o James A. Reither, “Redefining the Wiring Process” (Sourcebook)
o Erika Lindemann,”What the process involves” (blog)
o Dennis Lynch, Diana George and Marilyn Cooper, “Moments of Argument:
Agonistic Inquiry and Confrontational Cooperation” (Blackboard)
By 10/26: Blog post preliminary idea as written to your colleagues. “Pitch the idea”—
synopsis of goals and shape of the sequence. Read the blog postings of your group by
Monday.
10/29: Expertise IV: Revision, Responding, and Error
 Nancy Sommers, “The Revision Strategies of Beginning and Adult Writers”
(blog); “Responding to Student Writing” (Blackboard)
 Joe Harris, two chapters from Rewriting (blog)
 David Bartholomae, “The Study of Error” (Sourcebook)
 Sample student essays: “Antigone as Feminist Work”
In – class. Come in with a outline/draft of the entire sequence idea along with unresolved
questions. Peer feedback. Post revision by Friday (student sequence only).
UNIT III: LITERACY
Readings:
 James Slevin, “Universal English I,” Frances March Award Address. (available
online, see below)
6








James Slevin, from Introducing English, Chapter 2ˆ”Inventing and Re/Inventing
the Discipline of Composition” and Chapter 6, “Reading/Writing in the
Classroom and the Profession”
James Berlin, “Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class”
Linda Cornis-Pope and Anne Woodlief, ‘The Rereading/Rewriting Process:
Theory and Collaborative, Online Pedagogy,” (Intertexts)
John Seelye Brown, “New Learning Envirornments for the 21st Century”
Rina Benmayor, “Digital Stories” (mss. Word doc in Bb)
Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford, “Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked: The
Role of Audience in Composition Theory and Pedagogy” (Sourcebook)
Lisa, Delpit, "The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other
People's Children"
bell hooks, from Teaching to Transgress, “Building a Teaching Community”
11/5: Literacy I: Writing, Culture, Learning
Readings and Discussion
 Slevin, from Introducing English, Chapter 6, “Reading/Writing in the Classroom
and the Profession”
 Slevin, James Slevin, “Universal English I,” Frances March Award Address.
Online at: http://english.georgetown.edu (follow link to In Memory of James
Francis Slevin).
 Kathleen Yancey, from Reflection in the Writing Classroom, Chapter two,
“Reflection-in-Action” (blog)
 Sample student essays
OPTIONAL/recommended:
 Gerald Graff, from Clueless in Academe, Introduction and Chapt 1, “The
University is Popular Culture” (blog)
11/1 Case Study write ups due—deadline adjusted based on observation opportunities
11/5 Feedback on revisions
11/12: Literacy II: Digital Literacies: Theory, the Body, and Voice
 Linda Cornis-Pope and Anne Woodlief, ‘The Rereading/Rewriting Process:
Theory and Collaborative, Online Pedagogy,” (Intertexts)
 John Seelye Brown, “New Learning Envirornments for the 21st Century”
 Rina Benmayor, “Digital Stories” (mss. Word doc in Bb and blog)
11/12 Final sequences due.
11/19: Literacy III: Audience, Voice, Authority
 Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford, “Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked: The
Role of Audience in Composition Theory and Pedagogy” (Sourcebook)
 Lisa, Delpit, "The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other
People's Children" (blog)
 Student Writing Case Study: “Regina” (to be handed out 11/5)
7
11/26: Literacy IV: Critical Literacy and Multimodal Pedagogies
Readings and discussion.
 James Slevin, from Introducing English, Chapter 2ˆ”Inventing and Re/Inventing
the Discipline of Composition” and Chapter 6, “Reading/Writing in the
Classroom and the Profession”
 Kathleen Yancey, “Looking for Some Coherence in a Fragmented World”
12/3: Work on Course Volume and course wrap-up.
Joe Harris visit;
Final Projects for volume due around 12/10 (tbd)
8
ASSIGNMENTS
Assignment sequence 1: Designing for Difficulty
Summary: Design a pedagogical sequence that engages students with the idea of
difficulty through reading and writing. The sequence should be designed around some
specific content of your choosing. The sequence should be coherent (i.e. have multiple
stages that culminate in some way) but should not end in any kind of a traditional paper
or essay. However, the sequence should include a significant amount of writing, where
writing is used as a means for developing ideas and thinking. Imagine the sequence at the
beginning of a course, lasting at least three weeks—although you might imagine that the
cycle of activity would continue longer or throughout the semester.
For Monday 9/17: In 1-2 pages, develop your idea for the unit in rough draft form. You
can address the component pieces in any order. Your rough out of the idea should include
brief (up to a full paragraph) descriptions of the following pieces:
(1) A 1-3 sentence summary or capture of the assignment.
(2) What are the ideas of consequence at stake in your sequence? What are the big
disciplinary ideas at the heart of your sequence? (The proposition that “this is a
really important and difficult book and students should read it” is not an idea of
consequence.)
(3) What’s your hook? How will you begin where students are? How will you get
them engaged?
(4) What are some of the activities or specific pedagogies you might use?
(5) How, very tentatively, might the sequence unfold over time? What might be its
stages? In describing this, consider how you will design in stages that help
students deepen and complicate their ideas?
(6) What is the role of writing in the sequence? What kinds of writing will they do?
(7) What is your role as instructor in this process? How will you model engaging with
difficulty?
In class, be prepared to discuss your principles and assumptions behind the assignment,
especially around the idea of difficulty.
For the final assignment write-up you will develop a fuller rationale and more detail than
you need for this first draft. The most important part of this draft is to convey the
essential ideas so that you can share them with your working group. PLEASE bring two
copies of your write-up and post your drafts to the blog before class. If you get them up
by Sunday you can write your group and let them know it is there. That is optimal but not
everyone might be able to get it up by Sunday.
9
ASSIGNMENTS
Assignment Sequence #2: Expertise and Academic Writing
Summary:
Design an assignment sequence or “progression” whose purpose is to help students
engage with writing as intellectual work, in the context of academic discourse. Your
sequence, which you should imagine unfolding over something like 3-4 weeks, should
include some version of the following elements:

Several different stages of reading and writing constituting a progressive
engagement with academic writing;

Multiple writing exercises, probably representing more than one kind of writing,
and culminating in an academic or analytic essay of some kind;

At least one stage of constructive revision and rethinking;

Engagement of students with their peers, and use of the social dimensions of the
classroom in ways intrinsic to goals of the sequence.
Your sequence should be goal-driven, rather than readings or content-driven; but be very
specific about the readings and materials you would use and how students are supposed
to use them. The purpose of this sequence is to develop student engagement with critical
analysis and argument. And for the purpose of this assignment we will assume that this
will not happen exclusively in a context of writing about or studying expressive literature.
Although literature might figure into the sequence, you should focus primarily, if not
entirely, on non-literary materials, although you might use literary non-fiction writing or
other media (e.g. film) as part of a cluster of written materials serving a larger analytic
purpose.
Goals:
In conceptualizing and designing your sequence, you should begin with goals. Think
about which goals are most important to you (assuming you can design only for a couple
primary goals and a couple more secondary ones). However you state your goals you
should keep in mind some of the core issues that we have uncovered in our readings.
Here is a partial list:

The insider / outside status of student writers with regard to academic discourse;

The importance of attitudes about writing and habits of mind, in addition to
abilities and skills;

The elements of expertise, understood as learning processes;
10

The importance of helping students develop critical distance on academic
discourse (demystification and beyond), including the role of questioning,
understanding, and recognizing norms;

The role of disciplinary thinking in the development of writing as intellectual
work;

The importance of authority and voice in student intellectual development with
writing;
These are some of the key concepts for this unit; individually and taken together we
could regard these as pedagogical “problems” that your sequence design needs to
address. As with any sequence exercise, the broader goals would inform the entire
course; your focus should be on how a significant progression or sequence would
embody an address to these core goals in a fundamental way.
Content:
Your sequence should be goal-driven, rather than readings or content-driven; but be very
specific about the readings and materials you would use and how students are supposed
to use them. Although literature might figure into the sequence, you should focus
primarily, if not entirely, on non-literary materials, although this could include literary
essays, autobiography, etc. as well as any other kind of writing that serves the goals of
the sequence.
Format:
The assignment sequence write-up should have two sections.
1) Rationale and Justification (linking argument to design) as if writing to an
experienced teacher who might use the assignment and wants to understand
design as well as rationale (length: 2-4 double-spaced pages)
2) The Assignment Sequence addressed to students, at whatever level you want to
imagine. The sequence should give students clear directions for each stage in the
progression, and some explanation as to the purpose of each step and goals of the
whole. (length: variable, but not more than 2-3 pages)
Drafts and Dates:
 10/26: Blog post preliminary idea as written to your colleagues. “Pitch the
idea”—synopsis of goals and shape of the sequence. Read the blog postings of
your group by Monday.
 10/29: In – class. Come in with a outline/draft of the entire sequence idea along
with unresolved questions. Peer feedback. Post revision by Friday (student
sequence only).
 11/5: Feedback on revisions.
 11/12: Final sequences due.
11
ASSIGNMENTS
Case Study Write-ups
Case study write-ups may be in any format, suited to your experience. They can be
organized or plotted any way you wish. Overall, they should include these elements:

A sense of context (curricular, institutional)

Setting the pedagogical situation (course content, objectives, primary pedagogies)

Representing pedagogical content knowledge: The teacher’s designs as filtered by
your interests: What intrigues you? Puzzles you? Inspires you? Surprises you?

A sense of a story: What did you observe? What happened in the unfolding of the
teaching?

A sense of meaning. What is the case a case of? What are the takeaways for you?
What questions does the case observation raise for you about practice?
If you want to write it as a seamless narrative or argument or essay, do that; if you want
to chunk it out according to subheads reflecting the categories? Do that. If you want to
write it as an essay in three acts: First observation, interview, second observation, do that.
The format is really up to you.
Here are some sample structures from last year:
Sample #1:
 Synopsis of case and broad context (H&W course) (1 double space page)
 Overall course and Syllabus (description of course, readings, writing sequences
(3 double spaced pages)
 Interview with Professor (two pages)
 Observation (both sessions) (three pages)
Sample #2: (see sample)
 Summary (.5 page)
 Course goals (from interview and syllabus) (1.5 pages)
 Elaboration on goals and activities (1 page)
 Observations and Analysis (bridging goals and practice) (3.5 pages)
Length: 5-8 pages of double spaced writing.
Due Date: 11/1. Deadline adjusted for variations on case opportunities.
12
ASSIGNMENTS
ENGL722: Final Project Guidelines
Design and outline a whole course syllabus for a introductory-level course in reading and
writing at the higher education level (or some comparable course at the Secondary school
level). The purpose of the course should be to introduce students to literacy practices of
in both reading and writing. The topic, texts, and focus is of your choosing; but the
context of the course must include significant work in the development of writing and
rhetorical skills as well as critical reading and analysis.
The final project should include all of these elements. There is no single format
required, as long as all of these elements are included:
1. A course description/proposal, comprised of a statement of intellectual
rationale and pedagogical design.
2. A prose description of course goals accompanied by a guiding “rubric” for
evaluation of those goals (what should students be able to demonstrate by the
end of the course. The rubric should include:
o a range of learning goals including meta-cognitive goals and
descriptions of at least two gradients of achievement).
o your learning goals and the rubric must accommodate and reflect some
dimension of multimodal literacy (social writing,
hypertext/hypermedia, collage writing, digital storytelling)
3. A description of the course’s signature pedagogies (journaling, small group
work, portfolios) as they will run throughout the course, along with the range
of assignments for the course and their developmental rationale.
4. Two elaborated assignment sequences of 3-4 weeks each. The sequences or
progressions should be coherent and self-contained, yet also reflect, in
tandem, the developmental goals of the course. You are encouraged to
imagine at least one of the sequences as a multimodal sequence. Presumably
you will be drawing upon your two sequences, if not using at least one with
little modification
5. A syllabus outline for the whole course.
6. A bibliography of resources.
Dates and benchmarks:
 Blog post draft course précis (short version of the statement) 11/25
 Bring draft rationale, learning goals and single axis rubric 11/26
 Bring next stage draft: Whatever piece you want feedback on (goals, sequence,
whole) 12/3
 Drafts and feedback from RB anytime with 48 hours lead time.
 Final due 12/18
13
ENGL 722 Assignment 1—Final Feedback
Rubric for Feedback and Grading: Assignment I: As requested (thanks for the idea),
here is a feedback/grading rubric for the first assignment sequence. (see notes below)
Dimension
At Threshold > Strong
Strong > Excellent
Statement of Goals: Clarity of
goals linked to ideas of
consequence in the sequence.
Goals for sequence clearly
laid out
Goals laid out clearly; explicit
and meaningful connections
between ideas of consequence
and content / process goals.
Idea of Difficulty: Explicit
attention in the design for
engaging with the idea of
difficulty
Difficulty as idea and goal.
Some sense of what it is that
is difficult about chosen
material.
Difficulty as idea and process.
Multi-level definition of
difficulty (one that implies
development)
Difficulty to Complexity:
Presence of an operating
conception of moving from
difficulty to complexity. Later
stages of the progression
explicitly build on earlier ones,
including accumulating
intellectual tools.
A sense of progression with
difficulty. At the least, a
design for engaging
difficulty through
progressively harder
material.
A sense of difficulty to
complexity that goes beyond
merely applying difficulty
approaches to increasingly
difficult material, but building
toward a vision of complexity
in the material. Explicit use of
intellectual tools to enable
more sophisticated work.
Dialogue and Dissonance:
Attention to strategies that help
students engage a repertoire of
responses and learn to make
judgments about them. [this was
more of a feedback category
than an evaluation category.]
Elements of dialogue present
in the sequence. Sequence
accounts for occasions where
students produce and share
alternative responses.
Sequence actively engages
students with alternative
responses. Strategies put them
in a position to work through
alternatives in ways that
foreground ambiguity or
multiplicity, and be reflective
about engaging w/ dissonance
as higher order analysis.
Social Learning: Effort at
approaching social dimensions
of the classroom [this too was
more of a feedback category
than an evaluation category]
Includes some dimension of
group work or social
learning.
Made significant use of social
learning, especially in ways
that developed dimensions of
difficulty, complexity, and
dialogue/dissonance.
Holistic: Overall sense of
depth, cohesion, completeness
Good alignment with goals.
General logic to the
progression. All components
addressed.
Full alignment align of all
parts with overall goals; full
arc to the sequence; final
assignment fully synthesizes
previous stages, goals.
14
Final Project Rubric
1. Goals Statement / Rationale for Pedagogical design
 Assumptions and principles at work
 Clear statement of intentions how you are applying those principles
 Doubts or questions you have about your own design
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
4. Demonstrated application of a developmental approach for moving students
through a series of progressions/activities
1
2
3
5. Clarity of criteria for assessment/evaluation
1
2
3
6. Application of an expansive operating definition of literacy
1
2
3
7. Alignment of parts Content, Goals, Progressions, Assessments
1
2
3
8. Facility with repertoire of ideas
1
2
3
9. Evidence of reflexivity about choices
1
2
3
2.
Two well-developed sequences/progressions.
3.
Evidence of an overall developmental conception behind the design;
15