I've been offered a position in the PhD program at Texas Tech, and I'll be headed to Lubbock in about three weeks for a campus visit. Certainly I'm interested in knowing how they approach first-year composition.

I haven't yet decided what I think of their system. I agree that a classroom instructor can work as a coach, guiding students without necessarily judging their success. Part of my objection to the system is probably just prejudice--I like being able to do my job without anyone looking over my shoulder or jogging my elbow. But that says nothing about what's best for the students.

I'll talk with some people down there and see what they think. Thanks for posting this.

Tom

I've been following the discussion of the TTU model on both techrhet and the WPA listserv. What I'm most intrigued by is the comments of writing teachers I know and respect (or even those I don't know) who express thoughtful reservations about the disconnect between CI and the student -- as they see it -- in the TTU system. For the most part, the objections are not that the CI has to have ultimate authority in grading (for they do in the TTU model), but (1) the CI is too removed from the classroom, both to his/her detriment and to the detriment of the students, and (2) these people cannot imagine how the DI would go about teaching class.

I suppose that the WPA review might suggest something along these lines, but let me simply offer the following:

(1) Bring the CI's into the classroom. Perhaps structure it along the traditional English classroom lecture model, with one main teacher and 3-4 attendant TA's.

(2) Teach the class -- as much as possible -- in workshop format. Place graded essays from the class before the class, and discuss how the essays either reach or fail to reach the department's criteria for good writing. DI's could either be identified or remain anonymous, depending consensus with the CI.

N.B. that e-portfolios accomplish this sort of reflection nicely.

I get the WPA listserv in digest format, so I apologize if I'm repeating something already said elswhere.