2-25-19

After attending the class, I have 5 pages of observation and analysis to parse through. The

experience was really cool because Dr. Blackburn is clearly very comfortable teaching and has

excellent command of the class. The students were largely responsive, and in speaking with her

after class she said that they are a really advanced group and she can move at a fast pace with

them. She also said that they often make really good connections, which was something I had

noticed. I heard one student near me say that he wanted to argue something but he “didn’t have

the evidence to support his point,” which is key in rhetoric. The same student later said

something about seeing opposing viewpoints that Dr. Blackburn was happy about because they

will need to look up opposing viewpoints when they do research for their papers and annotated

bibliographies.

One thing I noticed was that the class was mostly female- I counted before class and there

were about twice as many women as men. However, the class broke up into groups and for two

or three of the groups the spokesperson when they discussed with the whole class was male.

Additionally, only one group actually had more than one member speak, and it was two females.

This disparity did not necessarily hold throughout the rest of the class time, as both women and

men answered Dr. Blackburn’s questions that she posed on the spot. Additionally, all the note-

takers that I could see from where I was sitting were female. Men as speaker and women as note-

taker fits neatly into gender models, so when the students are asked to delegate among

themselves they tend to fit into presupposed ideas. One way that I can think of to prevent this

would be for me to pick who was note-taker and who was spokesperson for each group, but that

might be difficult since I would have to remember who I had already picked for each task.
However, I think I could see how it goes and then if I see students fitting into gendered roles I

could step in and disrupt it.

Also, I was very interested in the use of technology in the classroom. Many students had

their phones on their desk, and one or two were on their laptops. It seemed like they had their

text online, but I intend to ask Dr. Blackburn about that in our interview. Also, students would

use their phones every so often in class but they would not stay on it most of the class, or even

longer than the time it took to send a couple of texts. I don’t know if she discourages that or not,

but she actually held their attention very well and kept them focused. This is probably made

easier by the fact that the class is so fast-paced.

Students were also quick to respond to questions, and tended not to raise their hands.

Students were able to jump in when they had ideas, and Dr. Blackburn would praise them for

their contributions. She seemed passionate about the subject, and excited that the students

seemed to share her interest. I noted during the observation that passion in a topic is so

infectious, and it makes her handling of it so much more enjoyable that the students probably

really enjoy her class. She also doesn’t call on people who don’t want to talk, which is something

that I personally don’t like for teachers to do because it puts people on the spot. She primarily

does not have to do this, I think, because students are already so engaged and quick to speak.

Though certainly not every student spoke, it was a relatively even distribution among the ones

that did. No one or two students were speaking the most.

The project that the class is now working on is a research paper and annotated

bibliography. They are supposed to bring in a “shitty rough draft” (A Writer’s Reference term) of

their proposal, and two possible annotations for class on Friday. Bringing in drafts and working

on them in class is resonant with process theory, so it seems like something that Dr. Blackburn is
using to practice her pedagogy. She also provided two different examples of things that a student

could prepare for their research proposal. She used what sounds like the logic behind a

Meaningful Writing Project (MWP). MWPs are found to be most effective if they combine

something academic with something the student is passionate about, or able to relate to. She

showed a video about how two men are institutionalizing and corporatizing farming, and she said

they could look at the effects of something like that on small, local farms. Or, one of the readings

was about how women in India are responsible for fighting against the takeover of soy instead of

mustard seed oil, and Dr. Blackburn said it could be connected with Blue Ridge Women’s

Agriculture. By localizing and grounding these theories and ideas that seem so broad and global,

she is setting her students up to potentially create their own MWP.

In reflecting on this class, I realize how much better a class can be if the students

participate. It can be exciting and engaging and fast-paced, whereas if they aren’t interested the

class essentially drags on. I want to know how I can get the class to be so present and mindful so

that the experience is better for all of us, though I suspect this is not something I can find out in

my interview.

Post-Interview:

I was able to meet with Dr. Blackburn for 30 minutes to talk about her policies and

classroom, and she revealed how very student-centric she is. Something that I thought was very

interesting is how she focuses on retaining students not in the way that the university mandates,

but by trying to make sure that all her students are fitting into App the best they can. She is very

mindful of all the changes they are going through, and tries to utilize this transition in her

rhetoric studies in her classroom by assigning things that make the students look at things like
their hometown or the university brochure in a new way. This process helps to enable critical

thinking about something that they were once the audience of and now can look at from a

detached lens.

In regards to actually writing in the classroom, she mixes low and high-stakes writing.

Students conduct low-stakes writing at least twice a week, but usually every day in a free-write

that she starts the class with. An example that she gave me is on the day they do peer review, she

has them write a “dear reader” letter of things that they would want their editor to know about

their writing process. Additionally, she says that she tries to keep students writing about things

that they care about because it makes them much more engaged in the class. She leaves

assignments open so that they can take it in many different directions and are as interested as

possible in their writing.

Finally, I asked her about her technology policy because I had noticed some students

texting infrequently but largely staying focused. She said that she has learned to ignore it because

technology manners have grown over the years, and students have figured out on their own that

it’s rude to be totally absorbed by their phones. If they need to step out to take a call she says it’s

okay, but as long as they are not being distracting to others with their usage she doesn’t say

anything about it.

The most interesting thing to me is that Dr. Blackburn uses her space as a way to help

students adjust to college. She teaches them about scheduling, watching out for their mental

health, and having an appropriate work flow. These are things that I had planned to try to work

into the classroom given that all my students will be freshmen and many of them will be away

from home for the first time. I appreciated hearing her concrete approaches to how to handle this,

and, again, seeing how she considers her students and what they need.