Philosophy of Composition

Teaching Philosophy

My teaching philosophy stems from the Platonic belief that truth can not be taught, only learned. Similarly, writing, which is a process of arriving at truth, cannot be taught, only learned. The teacher is the medium that facilitates that learning. I do not agree with the form of teaching composition where a teacher tells a student what to do. It rather precludes the entire process of learning and discovery. What a teacher can do is to tell a student what not to do. That steers the young imaginative minds in the right direction. That, to me, is good teaching- to allow your students to discover without getting lost in the process. 

But are students ready to plunge into the vast ocean of the mind boggling writing process? It is rather a sorry state of affairs that they are anything but ready. It is even more sad to think of the reason why they are not ready. They do not read. Period. I am not talking about reading text books. I am talking about the kind of reading that Stephen Krashen defines as Free Voluntary Reading (FVR). This brings me to my first principle, the first and foremost value that guides my teaching philosophy- the power of reading. 

It is said that reading is to mind what exercise is to body. If we had selfies to show off our reading skills and intellect, I bet people would be exercising their brains more often. Or let’s take another example. Would you participate in a marathon if you are not physically fit? It’s not very hard to answer, is it? The process of writing to me is like a marathon. One must be well prepared. One’s brain must be fit and well equipped with all that is required to complete that marathon. We are not even talking about winning! Reading provides that mental fitness, that level of cognitive development that is required to be a good and effective writer.

I also believe in the power of language. Interestingly, reading and language go hand in hand. Reading is by far the best way of learning how language works, of how language doesn’t work, of developing one’s command over the language, and of learning how to use language in one’s writing. Samuel Lover once said, “When once the itch of literature comes over a man, nothing can cure it but the scratching of a pen.” I  see a possible reunion of literature and composition here. Let us inflict students with the “itch of literature.” Why not integrate the two and end the decades long separation? Why not include literary texts in composition curriculum and have students participate in expressive writing? This might sound a bit odd, but I also propose to do away with the grading system, as far as writing is concerned. Since I believe in expressive writing supported by a sound knowledge of one’s area of interest (by FVR, of course), I think writing should not be graded. Honest feedback  of the teacher should be the medium to learn how to write. Let’s just stop teaching writing. What we can teach, though, is the functioning of language. The process of the production of meaning. It is interesting how once one understands how meaning is produced, one learns the functioning of language. One learns how critical reading and writing work. This plays a very important role in how one expresses oneself. I also believe that meaning is produced differently across different cultures. For example, the debate surrounding the use of single person pronoun “they” has resurfaced. While prescriptivists denounce the usage of “they” for “his” or “her”, arguments in favor of the third gender are gaining ground. Interestingly, my mother tongue, Hindi, does not have an equivalent for the pronouns “his” and “her”. The pronoun in Hindi is rather the equivalent of “they”, depending on one’s social relations. For elders, it is invariably “they”, as a mark of respect. For friends, it is a word lower in hierarchy, but still not gender specific. 

This brings me to my third value which is: a good teacher ought to recognize the presence of a globalized classroom. It is impossible to cater to the individual needs of a student, but is is not impossible to recognize the individuality of each student. In today’s world, American classrooms are as globalized as the world itself. The presence of a multicultural mass of students makes it even more difficult to teach writing. This makes it even more important to learn how to write and to just write. In such a scenario, the value and importance of expressive writing cannot be overstated. The only kind of writing that would make sense is expressive writing. To force students to do a specific kind of writing with good grades as their ultimate aim, defeats the purpose of writing. At least First Year Writing should entirely focus on expressivism. Yes, I am suggesting the extension of reading and writing rhetorically to second year of college. It might sound far fetched, but in my opinion this is the only way to inflict that “itch of literature” on students. The only way to make literature and rhetoric come together.