Argumentative Synthesis Clarity

I feel a sudden onset of clarity, Bartok.

In English 101, we’re dealing with vague instructions for the argumentative synthesis paper. To help clarify things, I send out an announcement just before class begins, and post it again the first week, explaining what I expect to see in their essay.

This is complicated by two factors:

1.        Students don’t always remember that announcement, or don’t bother to read it to begin with.   
2.        The instructions for the paper are vague.

The vague instructions, the course designers say, are on purpose, allowing us as teachers to custom-teach the essay in ways we think work the best. The problem is for this to work, we have to overcommunicate. And even with overcommunication, students get to the assignment, particularly for part two, and read the vague instructions and figure they’ve got a handle on things, when truth be told the instructions don’t follow the clarifications I offered them earlier in the semester.

So rather than fight against the system, I’m going to modify my expectations.

Part of the vagueness has to do with semantics. The instructions call for students to write about three “positions” on the problem or issue they’ve decided to concentrate on. Since many don’t know what a “position” is in this sense, they’ve asked for clarification. I’ve said positions=solutions, and even provide a custom worksheet for them to use to construct their part two outline so their outcome meets my expectations.

But I have to make the worksheet optional. And since it’s optional and not mentioned in the worksheet where the students have to describe the “positions,” it’s not always helpful.

So the epiphany today, reached while conferencing with a student: I will accept discussion of three solutions or three positions. Solutions may take them in one direction, while positions may take them another. I’m going to stop trying to shoehorn them into thinking the paper has to be exactly as I want it, and allow for this dual path to completion. One caveat: At the end, they either have to explain which solution is  best, or which position is best. That’s still fitting with the overall philosophy of the assignment, I think, and will lead to fewer headaches with the instructions.

ADDENDUM FROM DEC. 5.

I've had additional time to think about this subject, and had an enlightening conversation with an individual in the know, particularly about teaching and teaching internationally, which is what we're doing.

We have to break any molds me might have about expected outcomes. Students are coming into BYUI through a wide variety of backgrounds and academic experiences. It's come to my mind that my expectations have been exceptionally American since I started teaching this course. I believe I can maintain high love and high expectations while loosening the constraints I put on my students when it comes to the Argumentative Synthesis paper. Students can succeed without having to conform to my narrow interpretation of the assignment. If I allow a broader interpretation but still maintain high expectations, both I and my students will be happier with the outcomes.

This post shows a rudimentary new approach to this essay. I'm going to think about it some more between semesters and see what goals I can come up with to help my students have better success with this paper.