1. In Process Pedagogy, Tobin states he finds himself “borrowing postprocess language and methods to help students see how texts and writers and readers are always and inevitably embedded in multiple contexts and cultures” (16), while also arguing from an expressivist position that “while positivist notions of agency, authorship, voice, and self may be philosophically naïve, they can still be pedagogically powerful. In other words, it may be enormously useful for a student writer…to believe at certain moments and stages of the process that she actually has agency, authority, an authentic voice, and a unified self” (15). In teaching composition, in what ways, or is it even useful, can a teacher reconcile the idea that every writer is invariably involved in several discourse communities while also working to aid students in finding their own original agency and voice(s)?
2. Fulkerson notes a contrast between the importance of the role of audience for a text, which he states is obvious, and the concern with other concepts in compositions studies such as “self-expression, discovery, and actualization of the expressive axiology” ( 416). As Fulkerson claims that there is a greater focus on rhetoric axiology than expressive axiology in composition courses, what roles do these concerns play, or improve student writing skills, in comparison to writing with the goal of communicating with an audience?
According to Fulkerson, this so called audience now “stands in stark contrasts with the concern of self expression” (416). In other words, unlike the expressivists, the aim of the rhetoricists is not the improvement of students’ writing, but to have them produce work geared towards an audience.
ReplyDelete