# data[].attributes.body
Chanock believes that "An awareness of how academic discourse differs from other forms of discourse outside the academy" would be helpful in the argument about literature in a composition course. I agree this awareness would be helpful especially to those teaching the composition. I think it would also need to be defined though whether the goal of the composition course is for academic writing or will it go beyond that. I think it brings up the question if the composition course should only be about academic writing. Many students will not go beyond a bachelor's degree, so how will they be able to use their skills in the composition course after college?

# data[].attributes.headline
A Thought on Tate - Notes on the Dying Conversation

# data[].attributes.subject
A Thought on Tate - Notes on the Dying Conversation

# data[].attributes.body
Tate says in her article, " These discussions make clear that some teachers were insecure in their roles as writing teachers." I thought this was an idea that jumps out in a few of our other articles. They almost all mention the faculty behind composition courses which is usually the English department. However, it is mentioned that there is a disconnect between teaching English courses and then teaching composition courses. Naturally then, teachers of the composition course will be insecure because there is a lack of confidence about what the curriculum should look like.

# data[].attributes.headline
Four Comments on ‘Two Views on the Use of Literature in Composition’

# data[].attributes.subject
Four Comments on ‘Two Views on the Use of Literature in Composition’

# data[].attributes.body
Gregory S. Jay at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee—

The instructor argues against Lindemann’s claims because he is silent on one crucial point. This point is that composition courses are taught by the English department.  Therefore, the argument is made that composition and English are not separate. Jay argues that a composition course would be missing something if the history of imaginative writing and its contribution to the language was left out.

“Reading books has the become the occasion for their own questions about human growth and change.” – Elizabeth Latosi-Sawin at Missouri Western State College—

She argues that literature should be used in the first-year freshman composition course because the study of literature can relate to more than just literary criticism or analysis.  She argues that literature shapes us as human beings, and I think she believes this should be a purpose of the freshman class.

Leon Knight at North Hennepin Community College—

This instructor gives four points for having literature in the freshman composition class. He explains that it is practical, enjoyable, efficient to learn critical thinking skills, and a way to introduce cultural diversity.  Knight believes it is practical because academic reading is just as important as academic writing. In college, students write what they have read.  He makes the argument it is just as important for students to read.  He argues that if students learn to enjoy reading, it will not become a chore.  Reading teaches critical thinking skills, and finally, Knight thinks that students being exposed to a culturally rich range of texts will introduce them to cultural diversity.

Jeanie C. Crain at Missouri Western State College—

Crain argues that literature can be used in the composition course because she explains that literature goes beyond fiction, poetry, and drama.  Literature expands more genres than that. Crain extends on Tate’s ideas that composition courses should not exclude texts.

# data[].attributes.body
Literature or imaginative texts are suitable, according to Gamer, because they have multiple points of view and are multidisciplinary. Gamer argues that fiction can produce the same outcomes to its readers as non-fiction does; it can still persuade.  One of the reasons that multidisciplinary is valuable in the composition classroom is because the composition classroom will likely have students from a broad range of majors, interests, and goals.  The composition course then provides a way for students to question the limits of the discipline that they will enter.  Gamer uses an excellent example with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.  Gamer explains this text is multidisciplinary because it incorporates the construction of “general theories about how young children learn, about the origin of prejudice and bigotry, about the relation between public and private spheres, and about blindnesses built into the system of trial by jury-as well as constructing an articulate critique of the sexuality of science and of the general violence that accompanies scientific discovery” (285).  Gamer connects the multidisciplinary literature in a composition course to the beginning experience of a freshman at college who is required to take an abundance of courses from multiple disciplines like philosophy, math, economics, or language. I like Gamer’s argument because it is about removing the limitations of the texts used in a composition course.

# data[].attributes.body
Peterson spoke of in detail about the 1987 English Coalition Conference.  This conference was a gathering of professionals that ranged from literary critics, rhetoricians, compositionists, and researchers, and their purpose was to redefine the goal of English studies for all academic levels including kindergarten to college.  Peterson then explains that the resulting goal of the conference was as follows: “that language arts instruction can and should make an indispensable contribution to educating students for participation in democracy” (315). I thought it was interesting how the emerging goal of the conference involved democracy.  Instead of democracy, they could have just said society. Or even academia.  However, they chose democracy. Why? One of the earlier points Peterson was making about the college freshman composition course is to not limit it in its discipline—to not limit in genres.  The course should be more inclusive to the many factors that affect the students and faculty.  I believe the conference included democracy in their goal because democracy allows the idea of inclusiveness.  Everyone has the same rights in a democracy.  Everyone has the right to freedom of assembly and speech.  So much of English studies is about the language we use and how we use that language to create emotion or bring attention to a certain cause. Without the rights of democracy, what we study in English would not be as valuable because it could not be used or shared.

Peterson continues to explain how the college freshman composition course can be re-evaluated to include this goal from the 1987 conference.  Peterson explains that the common goal of the one-year course would be to have a “common view of reading, writing, speaking, and listening as social and interactive processes through which meaning is negotiated and constructed by individuals, in communities, and in the larger society” (317).  This would be utilized by students studying language through multiple contexts.  This would take away the previous limitations of the course.  Essentially, students would study and read a variety of texts—fiction and non-fiction—and each text would preferably produce a different analysis of language.

I would have to agree with Peterson’s thoughts about the college freshman course.  I think if it is focus on the study of language through a variety of texts, then it is not limiting to students. A college freshman English class will be most likely of a diverse student body in which many are not pursing English as a degree.  This class that is focused on the study of language will more keep in line with the goal established by the 1987 English Coalition Conference.  Studying reading, writing, speaking, and listening will prepare students for all degrees and all career paths.

# data[].attributes.body
One thing that Tate said that stuck out to me was "efforts to stimulate the non-writer through literary materials were at-best frustrating" (p. 306). I think I relate to this because that was my experience whenever literature was introduced. I was never motivated by it, and I never felt like emulating their style in my writing. They talked about works like The Brothers Karamazov and Oedipus Tyrranus to name a few. Do we continue to use these old pieces or do we work for new things. What is the argument for keeping works from so long ago? What would new books include?

# data[].attributes.headline
Tate, G. (1993). A place for literature in freshman composition. College English, 55(3), 317-321.

# data[].attributes.subject
Tate, G. (1993). A place for literature in freshman composition. College English, 55(3), 317-321.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Tate (1993) that it is important for a First Year Composition course to allow students access to literary texts that transcend academic disciplines by exploring humanity. I have personally never taught in an environment where the goal of a FYC course is to provide job training or preparation for other fields, therefore I have had the opportunity to teach composition with literature. In Nicaragua my students were able to overcome their struggles as second language learners when performing on the AP English Literature & Composition exam because they were able to not only articulate a unique interpretation and analysis of the text through their perspective abroad, but they were able to make connections and examine the universal themes of human behavior much more profoundly than my students in the U.S. that have been exposed to less cultural diversity. I enjoy teaching the same book each year, but hearing a different explanation of the characters, events, and themes from a new generation of students as they interpret the text through the lens of current events experienced in their public and private lives. I really can’t imagine teaching composition without the prompt of literary texts as source material.

# data[].attributes.body
From Lindemann's article, these are what I saw as the five reasons not to include literature. 1.) More of a focus on consuming rather than focusing. Using literature has more of a focus on reading the texts rather than writing like a composition course. 2.) Does not need to be "humanized" since students are already taking humanities courses such as art and literature courses. Why include more literature when students are already exposed through gen ed courses? 3.) Literature teaching offers the writing teacher no model worth emulating. 4.) Doesn't help teach style. Students aren't writing literature - they write about it or respond to it. This is probably where it gets into my question about creative writing and the line between the two. 5.) Few faculty members in an English department really care about their teaching.

# data[].attributes.headline
Gamer, M. (1995). Fictionalizing the disciplines: Literature and the boundaries of knowledge. College English, 57(3), 281-286. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Gamer, M. (1995). Fictionalizing the disciplines: Literature and the boundaries of knowledge. College English, 57(3), 281-286. 

# data[].attributes.body
My personal opinion about how to teach literature in the composition classroom aligned most with Gamer’s (1995) belief that imaginative literary texts and nonfiction that address similar issues should be included in the composition classroom because they hold multiple points of view and are multidisciplinary. This semester I am teaching Rebecca Skloot’s nonfiction biography, “The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks” in order to prompt written discourse about issues of scientific research, medical ethics, and racial justice. An imaginative fictional companion piece that addresses similar issues of racial justice through the trial of Tom Robinson is Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird”. Students can then write about current events such as the death of George Floyd or Black Lives Matter Movement by examining their own values and beliefs by making arguments and telling their personal stories. In this manner the nonfiction and imaginative texts can serve as case studies for exploring the human behaviors that we are witnessing and attempting to understanding in our own lives today.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chanock, K. (1994). A comment on “Freshman composition: No place for literature” and “A place for literature in freshman composition”. College English, 56(5), 585-590. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Chanock, K. (1994). A comment on “Freshman composition: No place for literature” and “A place for literature in freshman composition”. College English, 56(5), 585-590. 

# data[].attributes.body
I related most to Chanock’s (1994) perspective as a teacher of academic writing outside the American system because I taught AP English Literature & Composition in Nicaragua for 10 years (08-18’) and I have only taught English Language Arts in the U.S. for the past 2 ½ years. As I shared in the Week 2-3 Discussion Log, when teaching abroad how departments function within a disciplinary field and across disciplines is influenced by the cultural context and academic needs of the students. In a more collective culture the departments worked closely with one another. As an English teacher I enjoyed collaborating with the Spanish department because many of the weaknesses I saw in my students were also exhibited in their performance in their first language so we could support our students in overcoming their struggles by leveraging our linguistic similarities rather than approaching literacy separately. As Chanock (1994) points out composition teachers can perform a “service” to their students by focusing on what all disciplines have in common rather than attempting to address all of the ways in which they are different. While the culture in the U.S. is more individualistic, I have been lucky at the small public school where I currently teach because the Spanish teacher has been very open to collaborating and working together. In Nicaragua we had the advantage that our students were learning Spanish and English literature and composition, whereas in the U.S. Spanish is an elective as a foreign language, but we can still leverage our student’s English language proficiency to build Spanish as a second language. However, I have not had the experience of working closely with the Science, Math, or even History departments in the U.S. to discuss how we could improve our student’s reading and writing skills across disciplines as I had when working in horizontal teams in Nicaragua. I feel like when I was teaching in a foreign language college preparatory setting, the staff was much more sensitive to the need to support our students in all subjects since we were attempting to build English proficiency so our students could perform competitively at a university abroad. At the public school where I teach now the focus seems to be on preparing students to perform either in higher education or professionally, but not competitively on an international scale.

# data[].attributes.headline
Jay, G.S., Latosi-Sawin, E., Knight, L., Crain, J.C. (1993). Four comments on “Two views on the use of literature in composition”. College English, 55(6), 673-679. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Jay, G.S., Latosi-Sawin, E., Knight, L., Crain, J.C. (1993). Four comments on “Two views on the use of literature in composition”. College English, 55(6), 673-679. 

# data[].attributes.body
I feel like Jay et al. (1993) get at the heart of the argument about whether literature should be included in a First Year Composition course by addressing whether composition should be taught within the English department. Lindemann did not consider teaching English to be the same as instruction in writing, however Jay et al. state that, “if literature does not belong in the first-year writing course, then the first-year writing course does not belong in the English department”. I personally believe composition is a distinct field, however literature does have a place within the discipline therefore they are not totally separate. I do not believe the argument of whether literature has a place in the composition classroom has a binary answer; as Jay et al. point out, the debate likes to place literature and composition as extreme opposites; however, their relationship is inextricably connected. I agree with Jay et al. that the real question is how literature on occasion can be defined, selected, and used in a FYC course. Jay et al. (1993) seems to align more with Tate’s (1993) attitude that composition courses should explore human lives that transcend academic disciplines rather than Lindemann’s (1993) position that FYC should offer guided practice in reading and writing the discourse of the academy and professions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lindemann, E. (1993). Freshman composition: No place for literature. College English 55(3), 311-316. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Lindemann, E. (1993). Freshman composition: No place for literature. College English 55(3), 311-316. 

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, I did not fully agree with Lindemann’s (1993) argument that literature does not have a place in the First Year Composition course. I recognize that composition courses do not consume texts or write in the style of literature because they focus on producing academic writing, however I do believe the interpretation and response to text is a valuable skill, even if the literary analysis essay is not the only form of writing. Personally, I believe the curricular goals of a FYC course may broadly include literary analysis among other genres of writing. I will admit that when I taught AP English Literature & Composition we did focus primarily on analyzing and writing about literature, but I would take some time for students to creatively produce imaginative literature as well in order to fully explore the complexities of the text.

# data[].attributes.body
I think reading these pieces further strengthened my beliefs of not incorporating literature in the classroom. One question I wrote in my notes while reading was "Is having creative writing courses also to blame for the decline of literature used in the composition courses?" I think about we incorporate literature when the assignments done in composition are not typically as creative in nature. Where is the line drawn between creative writing and introductory composition? If we incorporate literature, what stops it from moving to creative writing? Just a question I thought of while reading.

# data[].attributes.body
Overall, reading through some of these essays, it felt as if I was being pressured to consider using literature in the composition classroom. They felt rather forced in their arguments. Not everyone wants to read "great" literature. What makes the literature great? It is just as subjective as what makes writing "great." I think my argument for pedagogy, which is what I have seen throughout my time in the program and as a GTA, is that pedagogy is made up of our own choices. There are obviously ways to teach that are not great, but I think we can pull ideas from different pedagogy to create our unique pedagogy that works for us and our students. I would consider using literature in the classroom, but it would probably be on a very small scale.