Uniformity, or diversity? That’s the binary that has recently been pushing teachers to one side of the educational fence. While the debate about national standardization in schools and testing in America rages in educational boardrooms, smaller-scale conversations about uniformity within a department are taking place at our very own institution.
Last week at a Beren Campus Writing Center staff meeting, our director informed us that the Stern English department’s five-part thesis model was no longer mandatory for instructors to teach. Since my time at Stern began, the threat of English Composition looms over new students and writing tutors throughout the year as freshmen learn to write argument-driven essays. Much of the trepidation with which students approach English and Composition here is due to the department-wide requirement of the five-part thesis.
Containing all the essential elements needed to construct an organized essay, the five-part model challenges a student to connect all of her thoughts logically right at the outset of her argument, and then to subsequently follow that structure throughout the body of the essay. A far cry from the five-paragraph form of high school days gone by, many students (including myself) struggle to adjust to this new way of thinking and writing.
After being told that the department was breaking down its longstanding structure of composition teaching, many tutors grew wide-eyed and nervous. Despite the sometimes rigid and demanding formula of the five-part model, Writing Center tutors have grown to appreciate the uniformity that exists within our English department. Up to this point, tutors and students share a common language based on the model and can often work together more easily given this understanding. Even as instructors vary, the requirements have mostly remained.
Now as teachers are left to their own devices, tutors are worried about the future of their sessions. No doubt it will take longer to decipher assignments and to establish terminology between tutor and student.
From the students’ perspective, transition from composition to a literature course may take more effort: presently, many literature professors can refer to the five-part thesis and composition students will be on board. But what if a composition teacher doesn’t teach the five-part model, but a more advanced literature teacher requires it? Students will just have to make more adjustments than necessary at this point.
Educators often debate the value of uniformity versus diversity across and within institutions. As far as national standards go, many believe that standardization only produces a mediocre outcome. As Sandra Stotsky, a professor of education reform at the University of Arkansas writes in her article “Equalizing Mediocrity,” “The Common Core standards [in math and science] may accomplish the goal of equalizing education but not in a way the supporters initially hoped: they may lead to more uniformly mediocre student achievement than we now have.”
Similarly, experts are quick to point out that America is falling behind educationally, especially in math and science, and thus losing its economic competitiveness against other countries in the long run. Educators search for solutions in other countries whose systems seem to yield better results—interestingly, many land on Finland. In “Why Do We Focus On Finland? A Must-Have Guidebook” Jeff Dunn writes, “Teachers are largely responsible for developing their own curriculum within (…) basic guidelines, assessing student progress, and running virtually every aspect of the children’s educational experience.”
Since the majority of America opposes national standardization in some form (Gallup records that 64% of Americans say there is “too much emphasis on testing”) it’s no surprise that this mentality has seeped into college departments, and that our own English department is experiencing a new wave of diversification.
In our specific case, however, I’m not convinced that diversification is the way to go. I’ve already pointed to the challenges that I and my fellow tutors will likely face in the Writing Center once these changes take effect this semester, as well as the type of adjustments students may have to make between literature classes. But more importantly, the potential loss that the department and its students may suffer from a lack of the five-part thesis instruction is the real concern.
As someone who has benefited from the model’s emphasis on logical coherence and its demand for high organization, I can say with certainty that my writing and thinking is the better for it. The model transcends literature courses and can be utilized in any course, even if loosely. The consistent instruction I received from English professors here has taught me to read more carefully, write more thoughtfully and to hold myself to a high standard of academic integrity and intellectual capability. Constructing a well-thought out argument has honed a strong voice on paper, as well as in person.
To that end, I hope that our department’s five-part model is retained by the majority of instructors. If education is meant to produce an independently thinking individual beyond uniform standard who can communicate her thoughts powerfully, this formulation is definitely a key.