History of First-Year Composition

Posted on September 23, 2016 inENG810, Paper #1

First-year composition, or introductory composition, first emerged in 1885 at Harvard University after implementing a writing component to its 1874 entrance exam, which consisted of a writing prompt selected by faculty; the results were dismal. According to Crowley, Harvard’s purpose for instituting this

course was to “produce an educated person” (9) and to address the “illiteracy of American boys” (Coxwell-Tague and Lunsford xiii). [Click here to see the 1869 Harvard entrance exam.] This composition course was meant to be temporary; however, it was soon adopted by other institutions fifteen years later. According to McComiskey, quoting Connors, “during the last quarter of the nineteenth century, a “literacy crisis” (caused by loose admissions policies resulting from the Morrill Act) led to the requirement of first-year composition” (9). This course soon became a required course at universities and colleges (private and public alike) throughout the nation.

However, despite being seen as an important element to a university education, because scholarship in the field wasn’t taken seriously, the teaching of first-year composition/introductory composition became relegated to adjunct faculty and graduate students beginning in the 1940s, especially after the influx of post-war enrollment with the introduction of the G.I. Bill. Along with minimal scholarship, another issue the composition course had to endure was playing second fiddle to literature, which continued to dominate English departments well into the 20th century, although the importance of literature waxed and waned. In spite of its low status within English Studies, composition, especially first-year composition, continues to be the lifeblood of English departments, sustaining the department through any changes.

It was against this backdrop that composition specialists rallied against the reductive and overly simplistic view of composition courses, which primarily focused on grammar, sentence mechanics, and essay structure. During the 1930’s and 40’s, linguists led the charge for changes. According to Coxwell-Teague and Lunsford, the NCTE (National Council of Teachers of English), founded in 1911, hosted a small meeting in 1947 which addressed “the teaching of freshman composition and communication” (xiv). During the 1960’s, rhetoric became merged with composition, in regards to discourse and pedagogy. According to Lauer, it was at the 1968 annual Conference on College Composition and Communication that scholars, such as Robert Gorrell, saw the importance of rhetoric within composition. In fact, other scholars saw “that rhetoric had benefits for teaching composition” (Lauer 108). The 1960’s continued to be pivotal to the development of scholarship surrounding composition courses with the Dartmouth Conference in the 1960’s, which focused on the role of literature in the classroom (a nod to the continued importance of literature in English departments), the importance of voice in student writing (perpetuated by such scholars as Gordon Rohman and Albert Wlecke, and even the idea that the typical model of writing–exposition, description, narration, and argumentation– “dubbed “EDNA” by Sharon Crowley” (Lauer 115), was inadequate to composition pedagogy.

The growing attention to composition courses led to other major scholarly efforts during the 1970’s and 80’s. These scholarly efforts included conferences, journals, and studies. During the 1970’s, linguists began the “Students Rights” movement to give credence to students’ own languages (which was revisited in the 1990’s in regards to Ebonics), the Summer Rhetoric Seminars and NEH Composition/Rhetoric Seminars focused on composition pedagogy, and the “social turn,” which argued for the social construct of knowledge. Towards the end of the 80’s, Dr. Louise Wetherbee Phelps called the study of rhetoric and composition a “human science” (Lauer 110), which gives further credence as to the complex nature of teaching composition courses and the various pedagogies which scholars and teachers draw upon.

The twenty-first century brings with it new challenges to first-year composition, such as continued outside influence (other departments, administration, and even community and legislative interference), along with revisiting of past concepts resulting in contention regarding effective pedagogy. Technology has also brought with it the added layer of composing in a digital space and an increase in online composition courses, further adding a new complexity to an already complex discipline. However, conferences such as the New London Group at the beginning of the 21st century, focusing on a sociological and education-based approach to writing, demonstrates the continued worldwide effort towards improving the purpose, scope, and pedagogy of first-year composition.

Currently, first-year composition has a wide range of scholarship from which to draw upon and has firmly established itself as a sub-discipline within Rhetoric and Composition. With this in mind, composition’s multimodality and interdisciplinarity make it indispensable to English departments and institutions alike, especially as WAC and WID begin to take traction at some institutions.

 

Works Cited

Crowley, Sharon. “Composition in the University.” Composition in the University Historical and Polemical  Essays. Pittsburgh: U of Pittsburgh, 1998. Print. 1-18.

Coxwell-Teague, Deborah and Ronald F. Lunsford. “Setting the Table: Composition in the Last Half of the   Twentieth Century.” First-Year Composition From Theory to Practice. Anderson, South Carolina: Parlor Press, 2014. PDF. xiii-xxvii.

Lauer, Janice M. “Rhetoric and Composition.” English Studies: An Introduction to the Discipline(s). Bruce McComiskey, ed. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 2006. Print. 106-152.

McComiskey, Bruce. “Introduction.” English Studies: An Introduction to the Discipline(s).Urbana, IL: NCTE, 2006. Print. 1-65.