Teaching

University of Edinburgh

University of St Andrews

University of Oregon

University of St Andrews Writing Lab Workshops

Kidd Creative Writing Workshop II

I designed this course as an intermediate poetry workshop, envisioning it as an opportunity for my Kidd students to deepen their practice of the basic aspects of poetic craft as introduced in the previous course. In keeping with the balance I had established of alternating craft discussions with workshops, I began the course with critical texts offering broad advice on how to write good poems, including an excerpt from Rilke’s Letters to a Young Poet and Gregory Orr’s enlightening essay on craft fundamentals, “Four Temperaments and the Forms of Poetry.” These gave us touchstones for returning to the bigger picture as we delved deeper than we had before into metaphor, tone, diction, and other craft considerations. In addition, I introduced my students to certain genres of poetry, including the itinerary poem, imitations, ekphrasis, and dramatic monologue. I hoped this would not only expand their writing repertoires but also begin to provide a richer perspective on the potentials of poetic scholarship, as they began their research projects in earnest. Here you can find the course syllabus, as well as an example poem prompt I designed for teaching the dramatic monologue. I’ve also included the final portfolio guidelines I give my students, to illustrate the body of work my students are prepared to submit by the end of each workshop.

College Composition I

This is the one course I’ve been able to teach twice during my time at the University of Oregon. Because of this, I think it provides a good example of a refined syllabus, one that I’ve been able to adjust according to student feedback as well as through reflection on my teaching. I’ve included an example lesson in which I help my students practice identifying ethos, pathos, and logos in an argument, so they have an easy tool for critical reading and so they can start thinking about how to implement these rhetorical strategies in their own essays. I’ve also posted a sequence of three assignments that serve as the fundamental skill building exercises for my students, guiding them to identify a genuine question at issue, then to formulate a robust enthymematic thesis, and finally to outline their argument according to the deductive reasoning of their enthymeme. Feel free to browse the lecture slides for my lessons on questions at issue and deductive reasoning.

Workshop Guidelines

The following is a description of the workshop process, which I give to my creative writing students. This has been adapted from guidelines by Lindsay Bernal, professor at the University of Maryland.

Purpose of Workshop

A peer-review workshop brings together a community of writers to respond to submitted drafts in progress. Ideally, it gives all participants—students and instructors—the equal right to speak about a draft’s strengths and shortcomings. The purpose is to provide writers with appreciative as well as constructive criticism so they can return to the piece of writing with an enlightened understanding of how to improve it through revision. Another goal is to emphasize the value of constant attention and vigilance when composing for broad readership, as writing remains a skill for which no upper limits exists—even the professional or established writer can get better.

How to Prepare Before Workshop

Read your classmates’ drafts multiple times.

Make line comments. Point out words, phrases, or images to which you are drawn. State what is unclear or confusing to you. Specify which moments are particularly arresting.

Prepare a written gloss and critical commentary for the draft. A gloss involves summarizing the draft, pointing to the central characteristics, images, and themes, as well as any aural patterns (rhyme, rhythm, musical devices), visual patterns, etc. A critical commentary moves on to larger observations that involve what is appealing about the piece as well as what could be improved. In composing a critical comment, always begin with appreciative or positive remarks about the draft. Then explain aspects of the draft that did not work for you and why. Include any questions you may have. Write out any ideas on how the manuscript could be improved.

First Half of Workshop

The beginning of each workshop should be devoted to pure descriptions of the manuscript without any evaluation or value judgments. The workshoppers will share observations about form, about the architecture and movement of the draft, about the effects of the formal strategies used by the poet. Focus on the facts about the poem, summarizing what you see and hear.

Second Half of Workshop

The rest of the workshop will involve evaluation and constructive criticism. Workshoppers should speak as concretely as possible. Rather than saying simply, “It works for me,” explain what works for you. For example, “The metaphor in the third stanza conveys the idea of family commitment, which really helps to underscore the emotional center of the entire draft.” Instead of just saying, “I have a problem with this line,” say something like, “The syntax in the second line confuses me.” To suggest a cut, you could say, “The writer might consider how much of the second stanza is necessary, since she expresses similar ideas one stanza later with much clearer language.” Use your developing technical vocabulary (e.g., referring to figurative language, enjambment, diction) to name what you find worthy or in need of revision. The most productive revision suggestions attempt to answer these kinds of questions: How might the writer make the draft more itself? How might the writer make the draft more alive, more surprising?

Main Categories of Revision

Editing: fixing small, easily correctable mechanical errors, such as spelling or punctuation

Additions: inserting new material

Subtractions: cutting words, lines, or stanzas

Transpositions: rearranging words, lines, sentences, or stanzas