WRTG596: Teaching Composition on the College Level
Fall 2016 | Section 000 (14558 | August Workshop | Workshop Materials | Eastern Michigan University

Enrollment: 14
Forms Completed: 14 (100%)

1. Evaluate the following aspects of the workshop (A: Always, B: Frequently, C: Sometimes, D: Rarely, E: Never)

  N/% N/% N/% N/% N/% N
The activities and assignments in the workshop met my needs as I prepare to teach in the upcoming semester. 10/71 3/21 0/0 0/0 1/8 14
The instructor communicated instructions and expectations in a manner appropriate for a graduate-level workshop. 12/84 1/8 0/0 0/0 1/8 14
Guest presenters were well-prepared and addressed issues relevant to my preparation for the upcoming semester. 10/71 3/21 0/0 0/0 1/8 14
The instructor was available for consultation or assistance and allowed sufficient time during the workshop to answer my questions. 12/84 1/8 0/0 0/0 1/8 14
The assigned readings accorded with my preparations for teaching in the First-year Writing Program. 11/76 1/8 1/8 0/0 1/8 14
I felt appropriately challenged and supported throughout the workshop. 11/76 1/8 1/8 0/0 1/8 14
Throughout the workshop, I was treated like a respected colleague who was being welcomed into a vibrant community of practice. 11/76 2/16 0/0 0/0 1/8 14

2. Would you describe your instructor as __________________?

  Yes No RESP
  N/% N/% N
a. Knowledgeable about teaching? 13/92 1/8 14
b. Able to communicate ideas clearly? 13/92 1/8 14
c. Knowledgeable about composition studies? 13/92 1/8 14
d. Prepared for the workshop? 13/92 1/8 14
e. Skilled at leading and moderating discussion? 13/92 1/8 14
f. Open to the views of workshop participants? 13/92 1/8 14
g. Enthusiastic about workshop assignments and activities? 13/92 1/8 14
h. Intellectually engaging? 13/92 1/8 14
i. Fair? 13/92 1/8 14
j. Professional? 13/92 1/8 14

3. Please provide written comments to explain one or two of your answers to the previous question.

  1. The instructor was exceedingly skilled at leading discussion and intellectually engaging.
  2. g. Enthusiastic about workshop assignments and activities. Dr. Mueller presented enriching workshop assignments and always provided additional details for why particular assignments were done during the workshop. He was always excited to share information with the class.
    a. Knowledgeable about teaching. Dr. Mueller treated everyone with respect and embodied an "ideal" teacher. His method of teaching was teaching through example. The exercises we completed in the workshop were practical examples of exercises we could use in our own classrooms.
  3. Derek was prepared and enthusiastic throughout the workshop. I enjoyed hearing about his new ideas and trying new things together in the workshop.
  4. g. Derek brought activities into the workshop that I felt could be used in our own classrooms that would get students more engaged in our course (e.g. literacy sponsors, narrative literacy maps). Sometimes he came into the workshop pumped up about something he discovered online that he believed could be relevant to our classes (e.g. Book Vending Machines in Detroit news article).
  5. h. Professor Mueller's passion and abundant scholarship provided me with an expansive approach to teaching composition, ultimately convincing me that I am involved in some of the most important work on campus, compelling me to become active on campus and in the community, and inspiring me to pursue further work in rhetoric and composition throughout my career as a graduate student.
  6. f. Open to the views of the workshop participants: Derek does a wonderful job of finding the value in any ideas or thoughts we share. I appreciate that he encourages us to all think of new ways of thinking and preparing for being teachers.
    g. Enthusiastic about workshop assignments and activities: I like that every day he had a variety of different activities. If he was trying something new, he was very open about seeing how it worked out. He also showed us how everything we participated in could be adapted to our own first-year classes.
  7. e. Skilled at leading and moderating discussion?
    Derek built in to the workshop frequent opportunities for us to ask questions, often opening up the discussion to the entire group rather than simply answering the questions himself. I found this practice to be incredibly helpful, and I plan to use it in my classroom, as well.
  8. 1G I said I frequently felt treated like a colleague and welcomed into a community. I often felt just on the outskirts of everything. Not excluded, but not really a part of things either
  9. b. Derek is an incredible orator- able to communicate ideas both through explanation, and enacting teaching lessons in lesson plans with us. Really helpful - was able to show both the micro and macro stakes of teaching comp - on the day to day and the entire semester.

4. Please rate the quality of the following workshop activities and readings on a scale from 1-5. (A: Excellent, B: Very Good, C: Good, D: Fair, E: Poor)

  N/% N/% N/% N/% N/% N
a. Mapping activity 10/71 3/21 0/0 0/0 1/8 14
b. Responding and grading 11/77 0/0 2/14 0/0 1/7 14
c. Peer response 10/70 2/14 1/7 0/0 1/7 14
d. Small group time with UR and WIA 10/70 1/7 2/14 0/0 1/7 14

N.b. The workshop evaluation form included additional questions about specific readings and guests. While these responses were extremely helpful for planning future iterations of the workshop, I have decided not to circulate them publicly online. -DM

5. Please provide written comments to explain one or two of your answers to the previous question.

  1. The mapping and hologram activities were fun and easily exportable into FYW classrooms
  2. i. Guest: Chalice Randazzo. Chalice provided applicable exercises and personal experiences for how to establish ethos during the first class period and mediate behavioral problems and challenges.
  3. The Powell piece was good though I was a little turned off by the combative language. I wasn't sure why.
  4. While all panel's were informative, some of them were boring.
  5. I found all of the panels and visitors to be very helpful. The Hologram/Present Absence Activity was one of my favorite visual activities we did.
  6. Some of our guest speakers were really useful in helping me think about exercises and/or policies to execute in my own classroom (i.e., f, i, l).
  7. j. Meeting with past and present GAs to bounce ideas related to theory, lesson planning, and general logistics, was one of the most valuable aspects of the workshop. By giving us the opportunity to merge our rigorous days of training with advice on active practice, trial and error within the classroom was a vital component in our process as student-instructors.
  8. d. Small group time with WIA and UR: This was very helpful to me to actually get in-class time to dig through these books with my peers. I feel like I have a better understanding of how to incorporate these into my class, and it was great to see the ideas the other GAs had for using these to create in-class activities.
    i. Chalice Randazzo: Every guest who visited the class was very helpful and informative about the program or just the university in general, but I really enjoyed Chalice because she had a different perspective on classroom management than anyone else we heard. Her style is very different from mine, but I am feeling inspired about ways I can adapt a slightly different persona when I need to take control of a difficult or disruptive classroom situation.
  9. l. Guests: Ann Blakeslee and Kim Pavlock (UWC)
    Ann and Kim explained the benefits of the UWC clearly and effectively. They also explained in great detail the myriad services available to instructors, which will prove exceptionally beneficial later on. Finally, they gave detailed descriptions of their expectations, and explained their discouraging instructors from assigning visits to the UWC for the entire class.
  10. 4H, Sponsors of Literacy. I felt that this idea of sponsors could have been communicated in 5 minutes rather than an hour's worth of reading time. I would have preffered using that hour for working on my syllabus or something
  11. I love the hologram activity - I want to bring this into my classroom. I really appreciate the opportunity to ask questions with experienced GA's, both at the beginning of the workshop and the end.

6. What changes would you recommend to the workshop?

  1. If there could be a function of the time to look at each other's materials, that could be useful.
  2. I would add time in the workshops for the GAs to review each other's teaching materials. Perhaps sponsor thirty minutes one day for pairs of GAs to trade and review syllabi, assignment rubrics, etc.
  3. I thought the balance of time was good.
  4. None.
  5. I would like to have discussed some of the readings we did in more depth and potentially have read some additional texts we could use in our classroom.
  6. While I feel that the workshop is more than adequate and completely exceeded my expectations, I might suggest an opportunity for instructors to cull through, divide, summarize, and present student reading selections to offer better perspective on productive lesson planning going forward with the most ideal method of incorporating different supplementary texts.
  7. Overall, I found everything we did to be helpful and related to my new role as a teacher. I would maybe have liked to spend a little more time on designing assignment sheets for the major projects. I also would have liked to discuss the Teaching with Lunsford Handbooks and how we can use that as a resource in planning our classes.
  8. I'm not sure. I feel very prepared for the semester, and although I'm nervous, I'm still feeling like I'm capable of succeeding at this graduate appointment at EMU. For this reason, I don't think I would recommend any changes.
  9. Narrow the information a little if possible. It was overwhelming
  10. Perhaps small group questions with experienced GA's so they can respond to individual questions and concerns. Also, more CANVAS training would be helpful.

7. What do you consider to be the strongest feature(s) of the workshop?

  1. The discussion between instructors and peers to create a cohort atmosphere.
  2. The applicable examples of in-class exercises were the most helpful features for me in developing my lesson plans and materials. Also, the workshop in general is very welcoming and showcases the network of support that the English Department and EMU provides to the Graduate Assistants.
  3. Grading and peer review workshopping
  4. Great focus on practical classroom issues.
  5. Derek was always prepared and excited.
  6. Building relationships within our cohort and beginning to support one another. Getting hands on examples and resources to prepare for the fall.
  7. We were provided with a large amount of information about how to run our own classes, as well as resources that will be available for our students.
  8. Collaboration with former and current instructors for direct experience-based lessons taking theory to practice.
  9. I think the strongest feature of this workshop is just the overall tone of each activity and each person we were exposed to. It was a very welcoming experience and I appreciated that very much. I liked that there was no additional pressure or stress being put on us--I think this is because those in the department know that we are the type of people to do this to ourselves. The confidence that those in the department have in us, gives me more confidence going into this experience. In addition, I like knowing that we aren't expected to be perfect going into our first semester of teaching; we are very much encouraged to reflect on things that maybe didn't go well and learn for the future. Knowing that this is a supportive group, especially throughout the first semester, puts me more at ease.
  10. The sense of camaraderie I experienced as I interacted with my cohort on a daily basis for two weeks was the best benefit I could have received from this workshop. The program is supportive, and my fellow GAs are no exception.
  11. The activities and discussions in the workshop were a great way to learn
  12. I enjoyed actually having to do the literacy map and peer revision: enacting the lessons we will end up teaching gives great perspective on the students experience.

8. Please rate the overall quality of the August ENGL596 Workshop. (A: Excellent, B: Very Good, C: Good, D: Fair, E: Poor)

  N/% N/% N/% N/% N/% N
Workshop Overall 10/71 3/21 0/0 1/7 0/0 14

9. Please rate the overall quality of the instructor leading the August ENGL596 Workshop. (A: Excellent, B: Very Good, C: Good, D: Fair, E: Poor)

  N/% N/% N/% N/% N/% N
Instructor Overall 12/86 1/7 0/0 1/7 0/0 14

10. Use the this space to provide any additional comments you want to share about the instructor or the workshop.

  1. The 596 workshop is an outstanding resource for the First-year Writing Program and for the Graduate Students teaching Writing 120/121. Every hour was carefully planned and two-week period in the workshop was well spent.
  2. This workshop has been HUGELY helpful! I feel ready to begin this semester in a way I didn't before the workshop began. The tools, resources, and advice I've received during this workshop have been truly invaluable.
  3. Learned a lot and had a great time! The workshop would be nothing without Derek Mueller. His lectures were utterly essential in preparing me for the fall semester and his overall effectiveness as an instructor is unparalleled.
  4. Thank you for providing this nine-day workshop! The other programs I was accepted to either did not have a workshop like this one or offered a very shortened version. I think EMU's program has a good balance of providing a clear structure, but also leaving us with a lot of room to make our own choices.