Enos, Richard Leo. “The Classical Tradition(s) of Rhetoric: A Demur to the Country Club Set.” CCC 38.3 (Oct 1987): 283-290.
Enos argues against the belief that classical rhetoric cannot (and should not) be adapted for the contemporary composition classroom. His rebuttal advocates for an open mind in two ways. First, he resists the notion that first-order scholarship, research of rhetoric, is superior to second-order scholarship, research that applies rhetorical theories to other disciplines and fields. Second, he points out that classical rhetoric is not antiquated or monolithic but rather an continuous aggregate of traditions and theories that do have resonance for the contemporary college composition classroom.
Welch, Kathleen E. “Ideology and Freshman Textbook Production: The Place of Theory in Writing Pedagogy.” CCC 38.3 (Oct 1987): 269-282.
Welch argues both that freshman composition textbooks do not reflect current research and theories in the field of composition and that instead, the theories that drive most freshman composition textbooks are based in Cicero’s five classical canons and Alexander Bain’s modes of discourse. Welch argues that the antiquated theories presented in the textbooks are written for instructors more so than students; textbooks both train new teachers and reinforce the current-traditionalist beliefs of veteran teachers. Welch advocates a pedagogy that favors written student texts over a textbook. By using student texts, an instructor can more effectively teach the importance of the context of whole discourses, which is difficult to do with the short excerpts used in textbooks.
Russell, David R. “Writing across the Curriculum and the Communications Movement: Some Lessons from the Past.” CCC 38.2 (May 1987): 184-194.
Russell uses two historical examples, the Functional Writing Program at Colgate (1949-1961) and the Prose Improvement Committee at UC Berkeley (1950-1965), to show the underlying issues that surround the institutional resistance to WAC programs. He argues that these programs failed to take hold at their universities because they were not able to successfully integrate writing instruction in the organizational structure of the university, which favored the German research model and the elective system and was suspicious of interdisciplinary endeavors. In order for WAC programs to succeed, they must be part of an institutional-wide plan, be adequately funded, and be given adequate time to transform from a trend to a tradition.
Connors, Robert J. “Personal Writing Assignments.” CCC 38.2 (May 1987): 166-183.
Connors investigates at the history of the writing subjects teachers assign students from ancient times until today by looking at how textbook assignments evolved over time. He discovers a shift in the mid to late 1800s from impersonal assignments that asked students to comment on an issue in the public sphere to assignments that narrowly focus on personal feelings, ideas, and experiences. Personal writing never completely took over writing instruction, he argues, and he points to the rise of the research paper, the use of literature in composition classrooms, and the emphasis on argumentative and expository writing as proof. Connors claims that instructors must find a middle ground between personal and impersonal writing assignments, tasks that allow students to start from what they know but to branch into an larger public conversation.
Freed, Richard C. and Glenn J Broadhead. “Discourse Communities, Sacred Texts, and Institutional Norms.” CCC 38.2 (May 1987): 154-165.
The authors argue that analyzing the written materials (the sacred texts) and terminology of discourse communities is a powerful way to understand the values and the systems of those communities. It is vital that students understand how to analyze the discourse communities they are writing to and in so that they can most effectively and persuasively construct their messages. The authors advocate teaching students ethnographic methods for learning about different discourse communities and cultures. Also, instructors should employ an ethnographic perspective on their own teaching and courses to discover what assumptions exist in their pedagogy.
Brooke, Robert. “Underlife and Writing Instruction.” CCC 38.2 (May 1987): 141-153.
Brooke uses the sociological concept of underlife (behaviors that undercut expected roles) to explain how both teachers and students redefine their traditional roles in the writing classroom. From his semester-long study of a freshman writing class, Brooke observes how students push against teacher expectations and teachers deliberately structure their class differently than others at the university. Brooke argues that writing instruction acts to disrupt the existing educational system and institution, offering a different model of classrooms in its place, one that favors autonomy and action.
Irmscher, William. “Finding a Comfortable Identity.” CCC 38.1 (Feb 1987): 81-87.
Irmscher argues that the reason composition as a field is undermined in the academy is because composition does not have research methods that accommodate the particular needs of research-teachers who are investigating the complex writing process. The empirical research methods used in the 1970s and early 1980s “complicated the familiar and obfuscated the obvious” by microanalyzing the composing process. Composition should borrow the insights of other disciplines, but it needs to create its own humanistic, dramatistic model of inquiry that takes into account the specific needs and values of the field. In his conclusion, Irmscher lists the criteria he believes should be at the forefront of scholarly inquiry in composition.
Hasimoto, I. “Voice as Juice: Reservations about Evangelic Composition.” CCC 38.1 (Feb 1987): 70-80.
Hasimoto equates composition’s obsession with the concept of voice in writing with Christian evangelism. Using the descriptions of the writer’s voice by compositionists like Elbow and Murray, Hasimoto shows how the discipline favors writing that has “voice” – energy, emotion, power, individuality, and feeling – and demonizes “academic” writing. He argues that writing with a “voice” is not appropriate for all students and in all situations. Also, he points out that advocates for writing with a “voice” use anti-intellectual appeals that undermine the importance of teaching college composition.
Beach, Richard. “Differences in Autobiographical Narratives of English Teachers, College Freshmen, and Seventh Graders.” CCC 38.1 (Feb 1987): 56-69.
Beach uses social cognitive development theories to understand the differences between the construction of the past and present selves in the autobiographical writing of adolescents and adults. He conducts a study of the autobiographical writing of seventh graders, college freshman, and English teachers. Based on the results of his study, Beach argues that teachers, when assessing autobiographical writing, need to recognize the wide gulf between their own and their students’ developmental perspectives and create prewriting exercises that help their students write more point-driven pieces that have a clearer distinction between past and present perspectives.
Roth, Robert G. “The Evolving Audience: Alternatives to Audience Accommodation.” CCC 38.1 (Feb 1987): 47-55.
In a study of three student writers’ composing processes, Roth investigates whether students determine their audience before they write or if they revise and invent their audience during the composing process. He finds that all three students use strategies to keep their audiences flexible and variable. Some of the strategies, which instructors could teach to their students, include considering opposing viewpoints, articulating arguments without being apologetic, and projecting the self as the audience. Teachers, Roth argues, should realize that audience definition is a creative process and not insist that their students define, analyze, and accommodate a particular audience at the beginning of a writing task because that can unnecessarily restrict the student writer.
