I suppose English 101 at Western is an introduction to college itself and to the skills that one needs to navigate four years in a university. The class, as the curriculum currently stands, doesn’t necessarily fit the definition that Crowley applies to historical conceptions of 101. I’m not sure how Crowley would react to our curriculum, but it mostly disregards a universal understanding of “correct English”. As I see it, English 101 at Western attempts to support students in experiencing writing as an endlessly variable discipline, and through this experience students will [hopefully] understand that the previous understanding that Crowley excoriates is a thing of the past. Part of the curriculum of English 101 asks students to explore opportunities and ideas at the university in a way that establishes a greater understanding of what the university itself offers – a far cry from the rote essay writing of the English 101 of popular imagination.

I’m not sure how the larger institution of Western views 101, but I haven’t noticed any interference from administrators who want to make sure 101 achieves the goals they have laid out in an extensive, campus-wide strategic plan. Maybe that interference does exist, but the 101 curriculum as I know it certainly hews more in the direction of current research and best practices than some preconceived notion based on administrative branding or other commercial nonsense.

As far as labor goes, I’m happy to teach 101 and I view it as a massive benefit to graduate students. We gain both experience teaching our own course and a stipend/fee remission as a reward.  Crowley takes issue with that approach, calling English graduate programs “inflated” and implies that English departments cannibalize their own professional opportunities by creating an assembly line of PhDs who will never find work in the academy (248).

I would take issue with another Crowley point, and that is the sense that 101 is recalled positively by most (228). Personally, I hated the class and I have nothing good to say about it. The perception at my school around 101 was almost unanimous negativity. It was the ONLY course everybody had to take, and I think that one-size-fits-all model of education reminded students of high school. My solution to the problem Crowley posits would not be to eliminate the requirement, but to make 101 a course with twenty different topics/curriculums rather than one.  In other words, let students have a decision as to what 101 topic they want to take. Modern English departments contain multitudes of subjects ranging from rhetoric to literature to creative writing to film. Let’s force everyone to take an English class – we believe in the universal importance of our subject [I hope] – but stop telling them what to take.