Scribd Logo
Cargar

¡Te damos la bienvenida a Scribd!

  • Crowley Sketchnoted

    Cargado por

    Clancy Ratliff
    55 vistas16 páginas
    Sharon Crowley's essay "Composition's Ethic of Service, the Universal Requirement, and the Discourse of Student Need," with visual annotations. I'm experimenting with this in my teaching.

    Derechos de autor

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Formatos disponibles

    PDF o lea en línea desde Scribd

    ¿Le pareció útil este documento?

    ¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

    Denunciar este documento
    Sharon Crowley's essay "Composition's Ethic of Service, the Universal Requirement, and the Discourse of Student Need," with visual annotations. I'm experimenting with this in my teaching.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Descargue como PDF o lea en línea desde Scribd
    Marcar por contenido inapropiado
    55 vistas16 páginas

    Crowley Sketchnoted

    Cargado por

    Clancy Ratliff
    Sharon Crowley's essay "Composition's Ethic of Service, the Universal Requirement, and the Discourse of Student Need," with visual annotations. I'm experimenting with this in my teaching.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Descargue como PDF o lea en línea desde Scribd
    Marcar por contenido inapropiado
    de 16
    COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE, THE UNIVERSAL REQUIREMENT, AND THE DISCOURSE OF STUDENT NEED We tend to ask, “Do they write well enough to get by?” and if we think they do we usually exempt them from part or all of the Freshman course. A more proper question. | think, would be. "How much better can they be taught to ‘write? For writing isa skill with no top limit Alber kithaber, "Death—-Or Transfiguration?” ‘There's gotta be a couple of ways we can do this. Tommy Le Jones 35 Quint in Black Moon Rising ‘Since its beginnings in the late nineteenth century, university-level composition instruction has maintained an ethic of service. Its teachers and supporters have argued that composition instruction served the needs of the academic community, as well as those of students and the community at large, by teaching students to write error-free expository prose. Since the late nine- teenth century, this instrumental ethic has provided most American colleges and universities with a rationale for requiring introductory composition courses of all students. ‘The instrumental ethic ofthe introductory course has been supplemented from time to time with other, more general, aims. During the 19208 and 19305, for example, the introductory writing course was conceived as site wherein students could be exposed to liberal culture (Berlin 1987). During the 1940s, inthe aftermath of world war, the required course was reconceived asa venue for the inculcation of citizenship and the distillation of democratic values. Recently, radical composition theorists have urged that college teachers of ‘writing use their classrooms to make students aware of social inequities (Ber- Jin 1991; Bizzell 9925 Clifford; Cooper and Holzman). Despite attempts to update or expand the definition of its service ethic, however, the required COVERED courosmows ric oF sRvcE ay Is e ‘iad| fhe abe on iy [is ore! ails Tntroductory composition course has always been justified, at bottom, iin strumental terms: this isthe site wherein those who are new to the academy learn to write is prose. in an essay entitled “After Progressivism,” Michael Murphy argues that the service ethic of composition studiesisso pervasive that affects thethink- ing of even the most careful, and most radical, sheuriss of composition. Musphy claims, for example, that complicity with the service ethic mars the ‘earlier work of James Berlin: All chat is potentially radical about Berlin’ deployment of “sociale epistemic hetoric” ... seems tome ... quickly coopted by it implicit association with compositon’s progrssivst baggage. The progressiv- jst discourse of educational democracy——along with isalled senses of duty (‘our responsibilities as teachers and citizens” [493]) and social welfare (“the greater good ofall” [490])—is so fundamental a partof the language of composition scholarship thar it can effectively ‘underwrite the work of even as guarded an ant-foundasionalist 2s, Berlin. (355; quoting Berlin 1988) “The problem with compositions’ subscription to agendas set out fo them by the academy, according to Murphy, is that in the absence of sustained eri- tique of those agendas “the compositonists enlisted inthe service of a an- seendent good embodied inthe proper function of the institution, and the composition students ft, once again like the discipline itself inadvertently ‘but undeniably disabled” (356) In this analysis Murphy implies that compo- sition cannot serve its own ends, or those of is student, 35 long asi serves the ends of the institution. And composition cannot cease to serve insti tional ends as long as composiionsts cannot eiique thir history of com- plicit with insiatonal values such a “faith in social progress” (345) “Murphy connects the service ethic of composition tots failure to achieve disciplinarity. However, Burton Bledstein’s study ofthe rse of professional- ism in America establishes that the inauguration and maintenance of disci- plines are ordinarily justified by a service ethic (36-38). And so it might be said (although itis not, often) that most academic disciplines bear a service ‘mission. The natural and social sciences can be construed to exist for reasons other than facilitating the disinterested pursuit of knowledge or the profes- sional advancement of their practitioners; and it can fairly be said that the research produced by natural and social scientist has, on occasion, comtrib- uted to human health and happiness. Too, the examples of medicine and law ye. (org a Net ais COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE suggest hata powerful discipline can be developed around an explicit service «tic. In other words, a service ethic is not necessarily incompatible with is- ciplinary starss ‘What is distinctive about the service etic associated with com, studies is its low staus Within the academy, the work done by composition Teachers is not imagined tobe as worthy as that of scientists, social scents, musicians, artists historians, literary scholars, or philosophers, all of whose professional work is imagined to perform some valuable service ether for the academy or forthe culture at large, Periodic attempts to alter the image of ever, its not supportive environments are more ypical of com Seen ves Pye stud themselves maintain faith in th COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE +257 position classrooms and writing centers than of other disciplinary sites, that isa largely unsung tribute to people who teach writing and who profess com- position studies. Butthis evidence doesnot suppor the claim that at-risk st por the claim that minority stadents prof from requited instruction in wrt- ing, at-risk stasis equated with minority starus—an equation that I resist. Indeed, i is my desire to resist equations like these that in part drives my resistance tothe universal requirement, which tends toward standardization and away from the recognition of students’ diverse ables and desires fT fam ight tha the required introductory course remains in place in order to Socialize students into the discourse ofthe academy, tothe extent that it su¢- ceeds in this it supplements or even erases students’ elation to their home languages. The universality ofthe requirement suggests 9 me that this 8, precisely, its point. _ a Tin any case, the Fequirement has nothing to do with what students need and everything to do with the academy's image of itself as a place where a special language isin use. The discourse of need postions composition reach- ron ‘ofa student need that i spoken, not by students themselves, Fouby people speaking for powerfilinsiutions Like the narrative of progress, the discourse of needs interpellates composition teachers as subjects who implement the regulatory desires of the academy and the culture at large. REQUIRED COMPOSITION AND THE DISCOURSE OF NEEDS In her analysis of the discourse of needs, feminist philosopher N Fraser remarks that “needs claims have a relational structure; a or “Baily, they have the form ‘A needs x in order to x" (163). The needs claims made within composition studies take this form: students need com- positon in order to write beter, to write error-free prose, to survive in the ‘academy, to prosper in a job oF profession, to become acquainted with the pest that has been thought and said, to become critics ofthe society in which they live. Fraser posits that such relational claims about needs are noncontro- ‘versal when they are very general, or “thin”: thin needs include the human need for food and shelter, for example. But as soon as needs discourse de- scends to lower levels of generality, its claims become “thicker” and more ‘controversial. For example: “Everyone needs an education in order to suc- teed.” Most Americans might assent to this claim, and if so, this isa relatively as8-+ COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE thin chim abou needs, Bu thicker needs aims can follow fst on the ees Of ts one “Everyone neds the sume eatin n order 10 suceed,” ot “Eeery Amescanneeshighereduaioninorderto succeed” Asneeds cams become thicker, that i, as they descend from the plane of mythology to the plan of ideology they invite contest. dower Foon elatvely ik neads ims cant be contend if the : ee area eerie ee (ee eee “ilbere ced, pps thn npedseasionsabourheredsof wk) fare mothers and their dependent children, itis not mothers or children who see aot wesisarsaeabe, Nordopebicdbomsonscbourtsaneepmg- — WWAMY'9 \oth ie, se ally cease tecag fathers as persons in ned of at iner- Rae oe iiemn tin Of cours, cunt rladonsof power mid WOK) vied 2 Tare pans welfare mother being delegated the cultural autor othe nels through which to speak and be heard andthe dacourse of pair hy consistently overlook the responily of meni the geting of cil Son Ave unfi myopie and interested terms of popular discussion bout ‘welfare indicate, even thick needs claims can seem thin (that is, uncontested 12 ind uncontestable, if they are manifested within a network of relations that ek macnede disguises their constructed, and hence politcal, nature. =BaE Fraser observes that analysts of needs discourse ofen overlook the power clans nikin ich canes anda rent ey oveook Some aly | importa politcal eects they take the interpretation of peoples needs as simply given and) , unproblematic... they assume that it doesn’t matter who interprets i eed the needs in quenon and from what perspective andi theightof | | wharharca thoy aka for grand dr the vocally mbored — “(O12 eae forms of public dacouse avaible for interpreting people's needsare (S/H Sipe indfir iy beneecestrinpoerpsael They need Aer & pb. They need te questions as Wherein society, in what institutions, are authoritative need interpretations developed? and What sorts of social relations are in force among the inerloctors or co-interpreters? (16)) ee $$$ at = Thecin har dens ed ei compestonstucon stadia’) renus of power relations that often go unexamined within composition theory | how fo and pedagogyAs a resul, the political, interested aspects of such claims are) ) sa pint y-point consideration of Frasers analysisdemonstrates.\" : First: when power relations are not taken into account, the interpretation of ie ee pe ee ee a aaa SUAIeACe COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE +259 composition is deeply embedded in a number of institutional and cultural discourses. The academic discourses that affect or have affected composition instruction include liberal education, humanism, general education, and pro- gressivism, as well as the discursive practices of testing, grading, and rank- ‘ng; the cultural discourses tha affect composition include those of literacy, clas, and race. That is to say, composition is administered and taught in a such thicker discursive network than are many other academic courses. Despite its considerable ideological freight, however, within the current discursive climate of composition studies the claim that students need com- position is treated asa thin claim. Thats, itis very difficult to contest it with- See aeeamenme EY Js 0 0 > to emplical suds have ever been dove to et i and ioral research of more ae ee tO ‘Fraser argues that three kinds of needs discourses are presently in circu- ston dco which wen eds om) [Sempra ree apni Siseourses and atempt 0 mo or hal hee reason; and experneeds Umege discourses, “which link popular movements to the state” (171). All three dis-~ courses can be found in the history of composition studies, but they have «emerged with unequal force. Reprivatization discourses have appeared periodically in suppor of the ‘universal requirement, even though there has never been much concerted ‘opposition to it “from below.” The single sustained example of opposition to ‘compulsory composition instruction “from below"—the student protests of the late 1960s and early 1970s—resulted in the temporary abandonment of the requirement at afew universities. However, the lack of organized oppo- sition by students has not prevented reprivatization discourses from occur- ring. Examples of such discourses are the media- manufactured literacy crisis ofthe late 1970, which resulted in the reinstatement of the universal equire- ‘ment at many universities; and postwar concern about the reentry of GIsinto| ‘American culture, which stimulated the introduction of required “basic sills” programs in a large number of American universities during the 19405. In- terestingly enough, in the twentieth century, reprivatization discourses about sone COMPosiTiON's ETHIC OF service composition have emerged with most ‘igor during postwar periods (1919, integrity was perceived tobe threat. instructors, exams, textbooks, invention of FY course, had begun: 987, 65-69). Today, iterpreting their neds and shaping the the required introductory course positio redefined pedagogy In composition prog here toa predetermined grading scale, sta, ready ranked agains a pred. es. And I long with Richard Ohmann,that the mas-taught coutec ela Positions sue dens 2 people who ave no culture, no history that mighe distinguish them abomons” om the thousnds ofthis peers who are also wring shown lents' performances are always al- Politics of needs interpretation: her ions are not interrogated, doesn’ mar. and fom what perspective and in the light ing, think, that i is not students but the om TY a sr hibyhcet the t Crwtey'e i Hed ow mr pet wes have to reHe Wega! SIMPLE ROUTINES a REMARKABLE RESULTS 2 ae {WO sademy sais served by he univers requiem nr here x . & ‘ment fulfills the gatekeeper function I described above, and insofar a the symbolic eapital acrued by the requirement relieves academics from the re- sponsibility of teaching literacy in their own clases and programs. In addi- jon teachers’ wilingness to speak for their students’ needs en- tion, compos interpretation assume that fair > equate socially authored forms of public discourse ae available for interpreting “people's needs Aside from course evaluations, there is no authorized discourse ‘within the academy that allows students to voice their concerns about cur- ricula. Teachers use student evaluations of their courses to improve the course ‘ ee) ext time ts feed; administrators use them to evaluate teaches. But st WL ‘ent evaluations are not considered to be valid input regarding the wort of, progam or equrement (unless of course, students ave good things 1 4eungs Crowley cake ths couse ely taught me how ro write”). Stodents do engage in roby unauborized dacouses aout euriua, ofcourse they circulate 5 Met sol) tubvesatinsof good and bad eoures nd instractors they compli otachers administer abot bad experience ina courte o programs ey wat a 4 leters to the campus newspaper; they all ther parents, who sometimes call pur vw i “ the board of regents. But none of these unauthorized channels give the mass fat 3 fe of students regular and equal acces o the groups who actually make cur n@ sicular decisions: curriculum committee, faculty senates, and boards of r-- gens or trustees. will So FO OA eee i hen the polis of needs discourse int foregrounded poli cal questions are neglected, such as, What sorts of social relations are in force ‘among the interloeutorsoco-interpreters? The hierarchical social relations Wi © \ it Le eS the American university are quite clearcut, if hardly ever articulated in au- thorized public forums. There are hierarchies of disciplinary (the maura le, EAP. ences the social sciences the humanities, appli o pragmatic elds such ‘education orhome economics). There are yet more imeach ‘ofthese divisions (physics purer than chemistry and both are pure than @ dents be Oe tieume aici renpetr to ete hy Fe cor composition. There are hierarchies of postion (president and provost, \ypne, dean, senior faulty junior faculty, staff, graduate students, undergraduates). ‘Composition teachers and theirstudent oceupy the very bottom rungs of all Ute AOn AL ‘hese hierarchical ladders. Thus, Murpy’s suggestion that compositions ‘remain in thrall ro the discourse of the institution might be frutfally situated Ae ACH. ——Inafleramipi of rion poston Why ines ne compe 262-+ COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE tion teachers been s0 eager to adopt the institution’ definition of their role? Could itbe that they have seen accommodation as a means of survival, how- ever marginally, within the nsiution? As Fraser notes, “members of subor- dinated groups commonly internalize need interpretations that work to their ‘own disadvantage” (169). Or could ithe that composition teachers are them- selves somehow served by their adoption of an etic of service and the dis- course of student need? j 1 think iis time for people who profess composition studies to consider ‘what would be lost, and what could be gained, if we dropped the discourse of sudent need as our legtimating claim, Throughout our history we have c- ‘quicsced to definitions of our profession and our disciplinary goals, given us pest pegeeredL by others. We work in academic and cultural climatsin which misperceptions hound concerning our work. I wonder why we sink that our professional tear interests are served by continuing to speak discourses that are imposed upon sa r 1s hierarchical and exclusive as they are. W oheg 4 Oo WRITING BEYOND FRESHMAN ENGLISH Co Weep ues ‘The univer eure ht bse the pti of eomporion inuconatdeelegeloh andithsieydtbderopmenetcomp- T fhe O4C son dies aswel Teonclde my ince ofthe univers requirement by considering what mighbe possible init absence. quel enor Many universes and colleges already offer an aay of upper-division cana Saini, apekadoeletiny, Tcecomean pds WEES ceding and document design, s well. I would lke to see this array of courses sien, yleerprror supplemented by a vertical elective curriculum in composing, a curriculum that examines composing both in general and ast akes place in speci he torical situations such as workplaces and community decision making. While 1 can envision challenging courses in invention or style or argumentation be- ing offered in such a curriculum, 1 would hope that such a course of study ‘would not confine student to practice in composing, Rather, it would help, “them to understand what composing is and to articulate the role it plays in ing their intellectual lives. The topmost reaches of an undergraduate curriculum in composing would study histories of writing, debate the poli- tics of literacy, and investigate the specialized composing tactics and rheto- ries that have evolved in disciplines, professions, civie groups, women's or- ganizations, social movements, and policcal parties—to name oly afew sites where such investigations could fruitfully take place. ‘yonder uo she Dynes oy Tw tree aoe (hovest question) COMPOSITION’S ETHIC OF SERVICE +263 Elective vertical curricula in composing will require the development of new ways to thnk about composing subjects, and they will of necessity de- velop ethical technologies to inculeate those subjecivtes in students who take the courses. cannot anticipate what thotesubjctvities and technolo- ses might be, but I an imagine one or two directions in which composition theory might develop. Composition has always been eclectic; composition teachers have almost always been bieleur»—handypeople—who pick upits of this theory and parts of that practice in order to get their work done. Com- postion teachers and theorists have begun to explore the relevance for our ‘work ofthe exciting thinking tari being done in feminist theory, thnocen- tric criticism, cultural studies, poststructural and postmodern thought, criti- cal pedagogy, and neo-Marxism. The usefulness to writing teachers of other theoretical developments remains to be considered: MolefiAsante’s notion of “the rhetorical condition” and his construction of an Afrocentric subjec- tivity, Pierre Bourdieu’s notion of Aabies, and Judith Butler's notion of performatvity—to give just three examples—all seem to me to hold prom- ise for composition theory and pedagogy (Bourdieu 1990). ‘The intellectual eclecticism of composition theory and pedagogy, where ithasexised hasbeen a good thing, suppose. hope however, that eacher- theoris of composition wll in the future be wary of theoretical and peda ‘gogical suggestions that rurn them away from a commitment to understanding. and teaching public discourse, We have, in ancient rhetoric, model theories ‘of composing whose proponents were unabashedly interested in influencing the course of cultural and political events. Teachers of ancient hetorie as- sumed that people compose only when they are moved by some civic exi- gency, Unlike the composing principles taught in current-traditional peda- ‘gogy (and in some versions of process pedagogy), which describe the shape ~ of texts andpce thought apply universally, the composing principles taught in ancient shetrial theories were lly situated in publi occasions that re-

    También podría gustarte