Dear All,
Here are the discussion questions on “L2 writing in the post-process era: Introduction” by Dwight Atkinson and “Process and post-process: A discursive history” by Paul Kei Matsuda. I am posting one question per entry. Feel free to respond to anyone. We will discuss them thoroughly in class.
1) Atkinson suggests according to Trimbur that the “social turn” in L1 composition studies and in other fields was a reaction to structuralism that was asocial in nature and hence reductive. The “social turn” translated into practice in L1 composition classrooms and then later in L2 composition. However, Trimbur’s critique of the “social turn” theorists is that process writing has limits and is inherently contradictory:
- Conceiving of the teacher as a facilitator and collaborator whose task is to empower students express themselves was problematic. “Cunning” students could handle easily what teachers were looking for in terms of “sincerity and authenticity of voice”. In what ways can this be dis/advantageous to students?
- The process / product dichotomy is somehow contradictory in the sense that “[students’] composition processes would eventually result in a product for evaluation”. To what extent do you agree with this claim?
- Defining writing as a process highlights its cognitive, individualistic, and hence asocial character. What criticism can you direct to such position? Within process writing, don’t we still use peer-reviewing, scaffolding, collaborative work, etc.?
No comments:
Post a Comment