Revolution Lullabye

January 25, 2009

Horvath, “The Components of Written Response”

Horvath, Brooke K. “The Components of Written Response: A Practical Synthesis of Current Views.” In The Writing Teacher’s Sourcebook. 207-223.

This review and synthesis of the research in response to student writing highlights the scholarship done in how writing teachers engage in formative evaluation in the hopes of sketching out a theory of response and evaluation. Many of the findings are presented today as tried-and-true maxims: avoid negativity, treat student texts as unfinished works-in-progress, move from global to local concerns, and act as a more experienced writing coach with students. Horvath ends by pointing out that response happens beyond the instructor’s written comments, such as responses during oral conferences, peer editing sessions, and class discussions, and includes a bibliography of scholarship in response to student writing.

Advertisements

Larson, “The ‘Research Paper’ in the Writing Course”

Larson, Richard L. “The ‘Research Paper’ in the Writing Course.” In The Writing Teachers Sourcebook. 180-185.

The ambiguous, often-assigned ‘research paper’ has three fundamental problems for writing teachers and composition. First, real research has no one recognizable genre, so the emphasis on teaching the 10-to-12-page research paper is misguided. Second, the research paper assignment overrelies on the use of library, book-based research rather than exploring other quantitative or qualititative discipline-specific research methods. Third, there are such a variety of research methods in the disciplines that instructors can’t possibly prepare all their students, who hail from all different disciplines, to do research in their field. Instead of assigning the research paper, then, Larson argues that we should teach students the multiple ways of seeking out information they need through inquiry and research.

Quotable Quotes

Every discipline “works from distinctive assumptions and follows distinctive patterns of inquiry” (184).

Research itself is “the subject – the substance – of no distinctly identifiable kind of writing” (182). It is the foundation of most.

Reither, “Writing and Knowing”

Reither, James A. “Writing and Knowing: Toward Redefining the Writing Process.” The Writing Teacher’s Sourcebook. 162-169.

In order to have students write from a discourse community, Reither argues, they must learn how to belong to that discourse community’s knowledge community. Good writing depends on learning how to acquire information through research and inquiry, and writing teachers need to make reading and thinking heuristics more central in their teaching and highlight the social nature of knowledge-making, acting as a co-investigator with their students.

Quotable Quotes

“We need to bring curiosity, the ability to conduct productive inquiry, and an obligation for substantive knowing into our model of the process of writing. To do that, we need to find ways to immerse writing students in academic knowledge/discourse communities so they can write from within those communities” (166).

“Academic writing, reading, and inquiry are inspearably linked” (166)

“Because we routinely put our students in arhetorical situations in which they can only write out of ignorance” (167).

Writing is not “a self-contained process that evolves essentially out of a relationship between writers and their emerging texts” (163).

“Writing is, in fact, one of those processes which, in its use, creates and constitutes its own contexts” (163).

Notable Notes

calls for the return of statis theory

knowledge community and discourse community

WAC can immerse students in a discipline and a discourse community, learn scholarship and literature

curiosity and productive inquiry

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.