Reaction To Durst

The first thing that caught my attention in Collision Course was that students try to avoid critical thinking at all costs. I wonder whether this avoidance is due to a general fear or dislike for thinking critically or if it is rather that the students simply have not been introduced to the skill and therefore are uncomfortable with its practice. I assume, as much of the book argues, that the reasons vary from student to student.

He spends a good deal of time going over the various responses to students’ views on their skills as writers. I found his statement interesting that “many of these...students sound so negative about their writing…the prompt did not actually ask them to assess their own abilities, only to describe themselves as writers” (41). He then goes on to explain the mind games students may be playing in these expository essays in order to make the teacher think they are skillful, or even the opposite. I intend to have my students write such an essay, yet I am beginning to struggle with the validity of such an assignment. From what Durst has exampled, I may be inclined to distrust the students’ self-evaluations, thereby defeating the purpose of the exercise. I suppose I could preface the assignment with a discussion about being honest and explaining that the exercise is for their own growth, but I remain skeptical that students will be candid under any circumstances knowing that I will be reading their response.

I found many of Durst’s assumptions of what the first year course should be both applicable and problematic. I agree that we should teach the students “to convey…ideas persuasively and eloquently, to develop a greater appreciation for and understanding of the best that has been though and said, to live the examined life” (51). I think being an effective writer gives a better appreciation for what others have said and written, which is crucial to literary criticism and criticism in any field. To live the examined life sounds a little romantic, but I think we as teachers need to maintain a bit of romanticism about what we are endeavoring. His discussion on ground rules was an area of difficulty for me. Durst believes that it is an essential task of the first year course to teach students the ground rules of academic living. Why is that our job? We are teaching students to think critically and to push them to the demands of college workload, which I feel is an enormous task in itself. I am still having trouble understanding why it seems that our job entails preparing students for everything that their professors in other courses will be expecting of them. I understand some students come for backgrounds where they are not introduced to the rules of the classroom and the expectations of professors, but if a student is that far behind then there should be a remedial “Intro to College” course that could focus on these issues. I think that expecting writing instructors to teach students so many things that are not part of writing clouds the purpose of the course and is counterproductive in our attempt to help students mold their academic voices.