By Thomas Jones, WIP 7001
Recently, I visited my hometown, a quaint refuge from the familiarities of general convenience and tangible progression. I drove by the same landmarks that were there years ago; the dollar-store sign that dimly lit the gas station, with letters missing from its marquee. However, I was reminded that although the infrastructure has remained stagnant, the people within it are dynamic, constantly adapting, developing, and reinventing themselves.
Thinking of my brief tenure outside of the town, it occurred to me that the struggles of transitioning from a rural city to a college town, where undergraduate enrollment can often be greater than the county population. This is something that I, as a first-generation college student from a rural county, struggled with, as it required assimilation and reframing of my cognitive perception. The most prevalent of these was my relationship with writing, as instead of listening to Papa complaining about corn prices, I was being asked to comprehensively evaluate the economic impacts of agronomy, geopolitics, and global markets using corn as a model. The dichotomy between conversational tones and evidence-based writing was overwhelming in the moment, but upon reflection, it highlighted a critical issue that I believe is often overlooked:
the concept that writing is not about reaching a conclusion, but rather about integrating complex thoughts and ideas from different disciplines to build a comprehensive narrative.
In the realm of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, of which I am most familiar, the tangible iteration of this is variable. Still, it methodologically requires the same principles of utilizing resources to employ resources and synthesize perspectives to build a comprehensive narrative to explain an observation. However, to imply that students will have the same aptitude for this feat since they are enrolled at the same university is presumptuous at best. Therefore, instructors must be conscientious to bridge this gap, preferentially in introductory courses, to spiral ideas throughout their program of study.
Although there is apprehension about incorporating writing-based assignments in a non-writing-intensive course, the implementation can be content-driven, which facilitates the principles while still aligning with the content in which the student has a perceived interest. For instance, instructors might begin with discussion posts that ask students to share their background with the subject, then progress to prompts tied to course content, and eventually to a WebQuest that incorporates primary literature. These scaffolding assignments provide opportunities for peer and instructor feedback in a low-stakes environment, structured in course content, and bridge potential disconnects before formal assignments in subsequent higher-level courses.
Now, when I think of those faded signs and crooked letters on the storefronts of my hometown, I no longer see them for what they are; instead, they serve as reminders of the resilience and resourcefulness that rural life demands. Writing pedagogy, especially for students from these backgrounds, should reflect that same principle: progress is incremental, but learning is dynamic. Just the same, the structure of the academic paradigm may be stagnant, but we as instructors, mentors, and educators must be dynamic in our strategies to be inclusive of all backgrounds and accommodate gaps in previous education, as everyone provides a unique perspective that is of utmost value.