I have a philosophy about my own philosophy of composition–it is not, nor should be static. It should constantly be developing and changing in response to my experiences with writing, as a teacher, writer and scholar. The environment I like to create in all my classrooms is a collaborative classroom. I believe that students learn best from a variety of sources and experiences, and that includes each other. I expect students to talk in my classes, and I give them lots of opportunities to do so. Students participate discussion groups, peer editing groups, project groups, and informal and formal presentations, depending on the particular class. Even when I use the traditional lecture format to provide students with information they need, I encourage interaction and questions with my goal to turn "lecture time" into more a class discussion or dialogue. 

Whether I am teaching composition, business writing, advanced writing, or literature, I emphasize the connection between reading and writing. Readings, in addition to being the content in some classes, are the sources for new ideas and facilitate the exchange and development of ideas, and  don't have to be canonical literature to provide writing models, to develop both language and analytical skills, or to offer the pleasure of an intellectual activity. As for writing, I view it as a learning tool as well as a testing tool, and I adopt a writing-across-the-curriculum model whenever possible. By that, I mean that my students engage in a variety of writing assignments–summaries, responses, short expositions, long formal papers, and a good number of recursive assignments for many of the reasons that Toby Fulwiler and other advocates of WAC have outlined.

I find that my general classroom philosophies reflect my pedagogical identity as a compositionist–I see myself as a  process-oriented New Rhetorician, which I view as a general approach to the concept of knowledge, language and communication in line with the ideas of Thomas Kuhn, James A. Berlin, Stanley Fish, I.A. Richards and Isocrates (just to name a few). I believe that language and knowledge are communal, contextual and dialectical (to cite Ann E. Berthoff) and, ultimately, that communication rules are determined by the discourse community that we belong to at any particular moment.

I believe that the focus of a composition class should be rhetoric–and the way I define rhetoric is the study of how meaning is made through language. This is a rather Isocratean and Ciceronian definition which implies that rhetoric is all encompassing knowledge. This definition, of course, poses practical problems for a composition classroom which lasts only 10 to 15 weeks, and since I am working with a definition that could mean everything, and thus nothing. Foundations, however, that recognize relative truths, the power of language to shape knowledge, the necessity of an abundance of knowledge to practice rhetoric, along with civic responsibility can make the idea of discourse communities more understandable and distinct to composition students, and also necessitates a great deal of emphasis on critical thinking. I believe that while it is generally impossible to teach someone to write in one or two quarters or semesters, I do believe that within that time we can teach students how to begin to recognize and analyze the elements required to gain entry into different discourse communities. This is a skill that I believes identifies a good writer and unites all writing experiences, in and out of the academy. It also develops analysis and critical thinking skills.

To put my theory into practice,  I rely on classical rhetoric as well contemporary composition methods and theorists. Much like other contemporary classical rhetoric revivalists (such as Sharon Crowley and Corbett), I believe that the five Ciceronian canons, the Aristotelian appeals, and the concept of kairos and audience awareness definitely benefit our students.  My one caveat about using classical rhetoric in the classroom is that it should adhere to the concepts of its own theories–i.e.  kairos and audience awareness of those in the contemporary undergraduate classroom.

For example, audience for the composition student is no longer the homogenous citizen of the agora nor the 19th century  "general reader," but the member of specific discourse communities.  I find students can connect this concept in a contemporary classroom, where they are representative of the very diverse world which they are a part of. When students understand the concept of discourse communities, it is often an epiphany. It gives them access to worlds they felt inexplicably cut off from, and they see the potential of their writing to actually have meaning and affect their world. 

One of the biggest misconceptions I believe that students have when they walk into a composition classroom  is that essays are supposed to spring fully formed from their pens and that this is a mark of a good writer. For students to write well, however, they must see writing as a process that leads to a product and they need to be willing to spend time editing and revising their work. They also need to see that writing serves different functions at different times. Portfolios combined with peer-group editing accomplish my goals for students to see writing as both process and product and allow me to emphasize the very necessary aspect of good writing–editing--and to help them learn how to edit. 

Of course using different types of assignments has caused me to think seriously about how I evaluate student writing, and I believe that portfolios and group assignments necessitate different approaches in evaluation–evaluation that reflects the collaborative nature of the classroom but that still maintains the final authority of the instructor. The contemporary composition classroom seems to be defined by its de-centeredness and it placing of power in the hands of the students, which I fully embrace. However, I believe that instructors must be constantly aware of the methodology and tools they incorporate into the classroom that exclude or marginalize students. The causes of such marginalization could range from forms of technology (as Hawisher, Moran, and Selfe have discussed in relation to class, race, and gender), to forms of evaluation, or to the philosophical or political views the instructor brings to the classroom. Of course, as for the latter, instructors cannot leave their philosophical or political associations at the classroom door, but I do believe that instructors need to be aware of how their views affect their students and the classroom environment.

The demands and the perspective of the contemporary classroom, with students from different cultural, economic, and educational backgrounds (as well as with differing goals) in a classroom geared to inclusivity and an amoral approach to language, makes it, as Terry Dean says, our job to be aware that when we learn language we learn culture. Here is where I see the greatest importance of my philosophical stance and my goals for creating a specific classroom environment. I attempt to maintain constant self-consciousness about equitably translating my theory into practice, not to mention being aware of the constantly shifting needs of students within a constantly changing educational system and world . Ultimately, I feel maintaining or at least understanding the inherent conflicts in these relationships is as important as my role of scholar, since the classroom is a place where I  find daily personal fulfillment and validation as a professional, and is an activity that informs my scholarship (as my scholarship informs my teaching). With such a view at the base of my philosophical approach to teaching and to composition, there is one absolute I can offer about my philosophy: It will constantly evolve in response to new ideas (which I must constantly seek) and in response to my experience in the classroom and as a writer.