Apostrophe's Facebook Page

Well, here is my poster. It's a piece of crap, and I would love to hear any opinions. Dr. Rice thinks it looks cheesy, and I completely agree. I am going to make it by inserting text boxes over a saved image of a Facebook page, but I'm so computer illiterate that I'm having a pretty hard time with it. Obviously I am missing Apostrophe's profile picture. I had thought about making an apostrophe out of colored paper and getting someone to wear it. Any volunteers? I really think the content is good. Rather than bold print, I'm going to highlight the usage rules in yellow. I also have to come up with some "ads" for the side of the poster. Just pull up someone's profile page (not your own though) to get a better idea of what it will eventually look like. Monday is my "finish the darn poster" day, so any opinions would be helpful! Oh and btw...all the ridiculous white space is just b/c I couldn't get it to save as a png unless I put it in paint...and I can't figure out how to get rid of all the extra nonsense. Can I emphasize how much I wish I had had time to present to Dr. Rice's class?!?!

Reflections on the "Writing Your Teaching Philosophy" Workshop

I feel like the workshop that I attended on Tuesday was (and will be) very valuable. We were provided with some interesting materials and excellent resources for creating a Teaching Philosophy which is personal, unique, and pertinent. We were given a handout with a sample Teaching Philosophy belonging to an individual from the field of Engineering, as well as a rubric for evaluating such a statement (created by a group of researchers from the University of Michigan). We were asked to read and evaluate the rubric. The rubric components focused on "goals for student learning," "teaching methods," "assessment," "creating an inclusive learning environment," and "stucture, rhetoric, and language." The sample Philosophy was filled with Engineering jargon, focused more on specific teaching instances rather than day-to-day pedagogical practice, and seemed to take little interest in the concept of inclusion. When polled, the majority of us in the large conference room felt that the sample lay on the border between "Needs work" and "Weak." The group of individual from Engineering, however, felt that it was an "Excellent" example, a philosophy which addressed the requirements outlined in rubric explicitly. This strange disagreement provided me with a very interesting learning moment. I realized how important a knowledge of audience is when writing a Teaching Philosophy. When applying for a first job in which the majority of my readers will be in my field, jargon might be acceptable and a more specificity may be appreciated. When adjusting my portfolio for tenure consideration, my audience may not consist of individuals specific to my field, thus changes should be made to make English-specific wording more generalized. Just as we emphasize in 5060 and to Freshman Composition students, audience is a very necessary consideration when writing. I am very glad that I chose to attend this workshop, and I have noticed as I read and research that I am finding components in articles which help me to better define my personal Philosophy and pedagogical stance.

In conclusion, I just want to share some questions-for-thought from the "Getting Started on Your Reflective Teaching Statement" handout (from the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, University of Michigan, Chris O'Neal and Matt Kaplan):

a) What do you believe or value about teaching and student learning? What do you enjoy most about teaching? When I think about teaching, I value (believe)/get excited about (look forward to)...

b) If you had to choose a metaphor for teaching/learning what would it be?
Teaching is like...    Learning is like...    The process of teaching and learning is like...

c) How do your research and your disciplinary context influence your teaching?
For someone in my field (my discipline), teaching involves...

d) How do your identity/background and your students' identities/backgrounds affect teaching and learning in your classes? The identity and background of teachers and learners are important because...

e) How do you account for differences in student learning styles in your teaching? In order to accommodate different ways of learning among students I ...

f) What is your approach to evaluating and assessing students? Why? I believe the purpose of grading is...

g) How have you changed and developed as a teacher? What led to those changes?

The Importance of Finding Your Footing

Identity:
the actavating image of oneself; brings our circuit of cultural response practices back around to regulation, for identity can also be defined as the image we use to regulate our own practices in resistance to the cultural practices foistered upon us (Haswell 1278).

I love the Haswell's inclusion of this definition and the infusion of cultural concepts within his article. I believe that writing is a reflection of personal identity, or at least should be. Cultural constructs and cultural formations tend to define what and how we write. The Western world tells us to value time, to value a linear form of movement. Order, pattern, system. Problematically, teaching such formats often creates a gap between the actual written words and the author's voice. In Holcomb and Killingsworth's text Performing Prose: The Study and Practice of Style in Composition, the authors move away from the use of the term "voice," instead utilizing the term "footing:

"The concept of voice focuses on the performer, but footing always puts the performer in relation to someting else--or somebody else: the audience." (Holcomb 61)
"Footing is a metaphor derived from the physical act of gaining a stable placement of the feet, but when used to describe social interaction, it covers a range of behaviors--from the actual physical stance speakers take with respect to listeners, to the emotions and attitudes they express, to the social roles, languages, and dialects they adopt." (Holcomb 61)

I personally agree with these authors. I think that in many instances "footing" is a better descriptive term, especially for students who are learning to write effectively. The term itself places them in closer relation to their audience. I also beleive that there has to be a way to develop this idea of "footing," a concept of voice, and I believe that that concept of personal expression is more important than the develop of structural format. Perhaps that isn't very realistic...But it is very important for students to have an idea of their own position within society, the importance of their writing, and the recognition that what they say matters. Holcomb and Killingsworth believe that writers' style can "position them socially" (Holcomb 64).

Three segmentations of social footing:

1. Social standing between writer and reader, an analogue to physical distance that guages position along two axes: one ranging from high to low, the other from formal...to familiar.

2. Social roles take up be writers and assigned to readers: advisor-advisee, expert-novice, urbane wit-country bumpkin, employer-employee, politician-constituent, trickster-dupe, lover-beloved, and so on.

3. Social languages, dialects, or registers--that is, styles of writing or speaking characteristic of particular activities, groups, or professions. 
(Holcomb 64)

I think this analysis of authorial position within the social space provides an intersting correlation to Haswell's twelve categories of "teacher-responder[s]" (Haswell 275).

1. Distanced aesthetician or rhetorician
2. Involved co-creator
3. Demanding coach
4. Persuasive motivator
5. Experienced modelor
6. Prompting dialoguer
7. Judicious lawgiver
8. Supportive parent
9. Expert reader
10. Sharp-eyed editor
11. Experienced diagnostician
12. Real reader

I often wonder whether or not teachers even have a real grasp on their writing identity, and Haswell's list remarks upon the idea that we need understand our roles as readers as well. How do we effectively comment on our student's work when we don't comprehend our own footing?

I find myself coming back, once again, to Brannon's Thinking Out Loud on Paper: The Student Daybook as a Tool to Foster Learning. The author's describe the daybook as "that drawer in the kitchen where we stick everything that does not yet have a place, but we know we might need someday" (Brannon 11). The daybook is a place for thinking, for developing ideas, for identifying one's self, not only in relation to classroom material, but also relation to audience. Students improve their reading and critical thinking skills, their writing and analytical skills, their ability to connect information from class to class, from classroom to real world. This tool is helping students to discover that identity. Brannon and her fellow authors are adamant, however, that the daybook won't work if it isn't modeled by the teacher. The daybook becomes a communicative tool in which students and teachers develop together, assess their footing, and find a sense of identity which they might not have otherwise discovered. As a teacher, I have to be aware of my footing if I want to comment efficiently on my students' work. I'm excited to eventually see how well this technique actually function within the classroom.

I love the way that Harris begins his article on community. I was a small town, country kid entering a university for the first time. I remember how defensive I would become when I heard people attempting to define my way of life, a life they hardly understood. I remember feeling lost and alone. The only sense of "community" I found that first semester was in my agriculture classes. There people understood me. There people loved me. Then things changed. I learned community isn't all it's cracked up to be.

Perhaps such a statement sounds jaded, and in a way I guess it is. I am a person who discovered a long time ago that sometimes it is easier to exist outside of what many consider "community." I am generally open-minded, and I would never intentionally step on another person's beliefs. I expect that sort of respect in return. That is the problem with some versions of the classroom community. Let me explain with two very different examples.

BLED 350, Summer 2007, second summer session. Fifteen students, only two boys. We had all been together in a different ed class for Summer I, and we knew one another, were comfortable with one another. We were a group, a community. We knew that Aumanda was a member of the LDS. We knew Ana's husband was in the Airforce. We knew Jaimie was in search of an MRS degree. We knew Tracy was the Chi Omega president. But what we learned in the four weeks of Summer II was more important. We spent that time talking and learning about ways to address diversity in the classroom. Our teacher, Genie, was bubbly and funny, and with her Master's degree in tow she remains the most brilliant instructor (or professor) I've ever known. Her questions prodded and poked. Her ideas made us think and question who we were, why we were that way, and why and how we needed to accept those who weren't. That class proved to be the foundational element of the current "me," the starting point of my research, the place where love was shared and relationships were built. A community of friends that lasted throughout my undergraduate career and whose impact is felt today.

ENG 330, Sping 2010, a long way from Summer 2007. By this time, I had changed my major three times and was now in my final semester and ready to graduate with an English degree. I knew people in the class of twenty-five, it was a small University after all. Some I had had classes with, others I knew by sight. Our professor opened Day#1 by informing us that we probably weren't going to understand what was going on most of the semester and that she didn't assume that most of us ever would. Fabulous...we are too stupid for your class. Undergrad was definitely difficult, but a little encouragement would have gone a long way. Classroom discussions throughout the semester were often heated. We stepped on each other's toes, but not as much as that professor stepped on those with whom she disagreed. You aren't category X, Y, or Z, so be prepared for a woman's size 10 right in the middle of your forehead. I have two good friends from that class, women with whome I cried and vented. We weren't a community, we were a tripod of support for one another.

The differences in these two classes are extreme. The sense of community from the two is vastly different. In one group, community was all of us and our clashing and disagreement which, in the end, built us all up. In the other, community was only what our professor said and those who agreed or were too afraid to speak up. I want my classes to be Version #1...and if they become Version #2, then it's time to find a different profession.

Bienvenidos: Su Casa Es Mi Casa

Texas Tech Official Mission Statement:

"As a public research university, Texas Tech advances knowledge through innovative and creative teaching, research, and scholarship. The university is dedicated to student success by preparing learners to be ethical leaders for a diverse and globally competitive workforce. The university is committed to enhancing the cultural and economic development of the state, nation, and world."

Eastern New Mexico University Official Focus:

 

• Prepare students for careers and advanced study.

• Impart citizenship and leadership skills and values.

• Support and expand the role of education and excellent teaching at all levels.

• Enable citizens to respond to a rapidly changing world.

I begin this blog with examples of mission/vision statements from the universities which I have attended. I often feel as though these statements are excellent examples of creative writing, pieces which are full of uniquely masked phrases which hide the societal need/desire to make individuals more and more alike.

"Assimilate...Become more like the "dominant" race...Live the American Dream..."

Emotional sentiments, such as "citizenship" and "leadership" or "innovative and creative teaching" are generally not really emphasized within schools or encouraged amongst faculty and staff. Instead we are encouraged to teach according to a standard set by colleges, we are told to promote a single sort of academic voice, we are goaded into discouraging creativity and relationships which might produce creative ideas. The unstated values of academia remind me of a song by Shel Silverstein...

"Our House"

I find the words of Trimbur not only enlightening, but also inspiring and refreshing. His concepts of collaborative learning provide hope for a way of subverting the system while seemingly upholding it (unfortunately, the most effective teachers often have to fly under the radar in this way). I love the following quote: 

 "powerful instrument for students to generate differences, to identify the systems of authority that organize these differences, and to transform the relations of power that determine who may speak and what counts as a meaningful statement."

Trimbur encourages the recognition of ideological controllers in order to break them down and subvert them. He is unafraid to examine the fear of conformity that entrenches our Nation, a pace which is entrenched in the idea of pulling oneself up by his/her bootstraps ala Ben Franklin.

I found Trimbur's discussion of the roots of collaborative learning very interesting. The technique was originally meant to assist in the teaching of literacy and expansion of higher education within traditionally excluded racial and cultural groups. As I read this description, I had quite the epiphany:

A classroom attempting to focus on teaching through a multicultural lens cannot be truly functional if collaborative learning is not a major classroom component!!!!

Without joint conversation, authority cannot be decentered, multiple images can only be shown rather than embraced, and dominant ideology will only be reaffirmed.

Yet doubt remains...can collaborative learning work with freshmen students? Can a classroom function without an explicit show of authority? Can one get hired with such a "hippie" mindset? Are these new ideas simply rosed colored glasses? HOW do I efficiently make students aware of the "Our House" mentality and still bring across the expected goals of the classroom curriculum?

.........

Hmmm...where did I put that magic wand?

I think there are times when every individual wishes that they were part of the fairy tale world of childhood stories. We long for a place where difficulties are solved by singing mice and a flick of a magic wand. As a mom and wife, I have days where I search the couch cushions, hoping that my magic wand fell between them and made me think it wasn't real. As a grad student, I have days where I am convinced an office mates found it laying around the office and confiscated it. I am sure that instructors have similar sentiments. The desire to make students learn what we are teaching them (or attempting to teach them) is innate for those (at least most of those) who reside within the four walls of a classroom. We thrive off of feedback and examples of applied learning, less because we hope to expand our fields of study, but more because we want the reassurance that what we are doing isn’t a waste of our time. (Regardless of what we are paid, the titles we possess, the kind of fancy cars we drive, the most valuable commodity in our lives is time.) It is this self-gratifying idea that makes Patrick Hartwell’s discussion of “magical thinking” so poignant. We yearn to believe that “students will learn only what we teach and only because we teach” (Hartwell 205). Such strong desires are the nuts and bolts which formulate our personal value systems, the ideologies which define not only us as individuals, but the messages brought across in our teaching as well.

I believe that each instructor does possess a type of magic wand in the form of the ideology with which he or she teaches. (By this point it should be clear that EVERY instructor, professor, preacher, teacher, parent, or student has a guiding ideology.) I think that each ideology is custom made, that an ideology cannot be replicated, that no single ideology can be the same for any two people. Like the wands in the Harry Potter books, each is unique and special. The bond between person and ideology is tightly formed, nearly unbreakable. In some instances (here you will see that I am a big believer in fate) maybe ideologies choose their people like wands choose their wizards. The problem with the ideological wand is that (unlike an actual visible magic wand) we (typically) don’t wear our ideologies on our sleeves. (I guess Harry Potter doesn’t wear his on his sleeve either, but you get the point.) I can’t look at someone and relay their personal ideology word for word. I doubt that most individuals can explicitly define their ideologies for others. As instructors, however, we need to move toward a point in which the identification and description of our ideological inclinations can be made visible to our students. Hidden ideologies lead to poor assessments. Hidden ideologies result in breaks in the line of communication. Hidden ideologies block definitions which can develop meaning. Hidden ideologies bar the pathway of learning. Hidden ideologies represent individuals in denial, individuals afraid to address their own beliefs, individuals afraid of themselves. Should we be shoving our ideologies down our students’ throats? No. But we should be making them aware of how we think, what we feel. Otherwise the only ideologies they will ever learn to respect are their own.

How do we teach composition through a multi-cultural lens?

As I am sure most of you know by now, my current research is focused on multicultural children's literature. In my research, I utilize Homi K. Bhabha's ideas of postcolonial thought. I am a big believer that the types of cultural thoughts that his work encourages, those that strike against the constructs of dominant society, should be directed toward the educating of our children. I don't know what statistics would say about the number of people exposed to cultural criticism like that of Bhabha, but I personally believe that the initiation into this form of thought comes too late. Many people believe that teaching college students about cultural concepts is crucial because it will lead to a trickle-down effect in which the ideas which break away from white-dominant thought will, through a long drawn-out process, eventually reach larger and larger groups of society. However, very few individuals are impacted enough by issues of social justice to make it an integral part of their teachings or writings or lifestyles. Most will vehemently agree that the concepts are important and should be spread throughout our communities, but most pass the buck, believing the progression of our society is someone else's responsibility.

I believe that the trickle-down concept isn't working. Teachers of young children, children's book authors, and parents need to be addressing issues of cultural plurality within their curriculums and conversations. The question is how. How do we initiate difficult conversations? How do we show multiple perspectives? How do we avoid offending people? How do we make those who remain engulfed in dominant cultural ideas take us seriously? Yesterday we discussed five types of grammar. The type that my group discussed applies to the grammar which we consider innate and naturally familiar. Problematically, the idea of "innate" grammar is relative. From a socio-linguistic perspective, language is determined by differences in location. Thus, assuming that each student has the same sort of grammar familiarity is an ineffective way of looking at grammar within the writing classroom. The differences in grammars should be addressed within an ideal composition classroom environment. This pluralism is a necessary component of multi-cultural learning.

In the last few weeks I have found a new love for composition. I enjoy the theoretical information we have been reading and the discussions regarding the best ways to teach composition. I believe that a multi-cultural lens should be applied to composition as much as, if not more than, we apply such a perspective in many composition courses. I hope to explore ways in which this can be done throughout the remainder of this semester. I am hopeful that this new mission will also help me to formulate ways to encourage multi-cultural curriculum formation for children as well.

Composition S.O.S.: My Friend's Facebook Appeal for Clarity

            I was on Facebook on Tuesday night when a girl that I grew up with began frantically sending me chat messages. She is a freshman and budding English major at New Mexico State University in Las Cruces, New Mexico and has always been extremely confident in her composition skills. Her panicked messages were in regards to her Freshmen Comp class and an assignment with which she was having a great deal of trouble. The instructor had assigned the class to write a personal narrative describing what he called a “turning point,” or decisive moment in the students’ lives. My friend had chosen to write about her parents’ divorce, focusing on the idea that there is no such thing as a “normal” family. All of this seemed very straight forward, and I was confused as to why she was so upset…that is until she described the second part of the assignment. The instructor had asked the students to do a literary analysis of their own personal narrative, but no other specific instructions had been provided. I was perplexed. How and why would you do a literary analysis of something YOU had written?

Slowly we talked through the steps of a literary analysis. We discussed ethos, logos, and pathos, rhetorical devices, and the purpose of writing, and as we talked, I suddenly realized that the strange assignment was actually doing some very interesting things. Suddenly, the author had been switched to the role of the audience. Could the main point of the writing be identified? Was the narrative informative or persuasive? What rhetorical devices were being used (without the author even knowing it!)? Interestingly, what she thought she knew about her own writing, even her own narrative, took an interesting turn. I am certainly not stuck on the idea of this assignment because I believe it could be incredibly problematic. However, it was very interesting, especially since we have been discussing ways to get students to take their audience into consideration. I don’t know that this technique would work with every student, and I am not sure that the professor’s instructions provided enough clarity regarding the assignment’s specifications. Yet, I am sure that my friend will have an entirely different take on audience and literary analysis than she had before this assignment.

Composition's Parallel to Performance Studies

            This semester I am also taking Dr. Borshuk’s Multicultural Studies course in which we are focusing on Performance Studies. We are concentrating on work by Richard Schechner and Victor Turner, two of the men who have helped to define Performance Studies as a discipline. These two authors believe that the vast majority of actions in everyday life should be considered performance because human beings are constantly performing for the society around them. Because we are socially constructed individuals, our identities are defined through interactions with the world outside of us, and as such we change ourselves and mold our actions to fit the normative thought of dominant culture. I was very surprised to find significant connections to the Performance Studies way of thinking within this week’s 5060 texts.

            Macrorie’s term “Engfish” is not only humorous, but also very identifiable in a lot of the papers I have been grading for 1301. Students have an idea of what they think an academic should sound like, and so they attempt to recreate what they have been told is appropriate for the scholastic world. Students mimic what they have been shown in classrooms, but such a process does not allow for creative work which reflects the writers’ opinions, interests, or personalities. They fail to give their work a realistic voice. Instructors need to provide their students with opportunities to bring their writing alive with personal style and voice. As we discussed in class, the difficulty of such an undertaking is that academic writing is necessary. How do we help students to find their own voice while still producing effective writing for the academy? I do not believe that Macrorie’s ideas are exactly the right technique, but at least the author is adding to the discourse and helping others to critically think about ways in which a writer’s voice can be honed.

            Like Macrorie, Crowley recognizes that writing itself is performative. She is disgusted with pedagogies which propone formulaic writing. She believes in writing as an inventive process in which students not only learn to write, but also face critical social issues which help them to create a broader mindset. Her comprehension of sociocultural issues shows that she recognizes that human beings are constructed. She realizes that human beings are constructed individuals, and her work signifies a hope to mold social interaction into writing to make it more informative, well-rounded, and authentic. Authenticity in writing will allow for inventiveness which will help to produce individual voice in the writing produced by our students.

            Though major differences exist between the opinions of Macrorie and Crowley, the two authors do provide some interesting insight on concepts of social performanceTheir pieces help to tie together the current pedagogical move toward multi-modal teaching of composition and the interdisciplinary world of Performance Studies. . With composition being such an important component of our culture as a whole, its nature as a show piece is a concept which deserves further study. If we are socially constructed, how can we ever truly represent our own individual voice within our work? How do we navigate the world of social boundaries in order to create new and innovative ideas? How do we find ourselves within a mimicked world?

Some self-reflection...

I want to be a college English professor. I want to teach students, to share my love for literature, and to positively impact the lives of those that I teach. I want to conduct meaningful research and address issues that are pertinent to the lives of students and the advancement of English as a discipline. Some might consider these lofty goals—realistically I even question whether or not they might be idealistic—however, I am hopeful that I can work toward my goals with diligence. This week’s readings have given me some very specific concepts to consider if I hope to reach my professional and academic aspirations. What are my personal beliefs regarding composition? What should a composition program include? What do students need to know to be successful college writers? What value should I place upon communication with secondary educators? What are important aspects of a syllabus? How will I keep up my end of the contractual agreement I make with my students? How will I convey to them the importance of holding up their end of the bargain?


I am sure that my opinions regarding the particulars of composition will continue to mold and change throughout the the course of this class, however, I would like to take the time to reflect upon them here. In all aspects of life, a lack of communication leads to failure to execute. I believe that this holds true for those of us in the academic world as well. As a professor, I intend to conduct meaningful discourse with secondary educators in order to better understand what they are emphasizing in their high school classrooms and how they are teaching their subjects. Hopefully I will be able to share information with them regarding the elements that college writing programs deem important for writing at a higher academic level. Without such communication, no real progress will ever be made in the field of composition.

I loved the emphasis placed upon the syllabus this week. I had never heard the syllabus seriously referred to as a contract before, and such a description led me to reflect upon the many syllabuses I have had in my years as a college student. Some are detailed; some are not. Some are explicit; some are vague. Some show extreme dedication to education and an awareness of student needs; others fail to focus upon the classroom environment as a place of learning and seem to display a lack of motivation on the educator’s part. I intend to take my syllabus seriously. I will not put anything into it that I do not plan to execute to the best of my ability. I will take the various needs of my students into consideration, and I will hold myself to the same high standards I will require of them.

I am dedicated to becoming the best possible educator that I can be, and I am enjoying learning about the journey which composition as a discipline, as well as those who have taught/are teaching it, has taken. I am beginning to realize that composition is a radically important and extremely undervalued component of the English field, a component which is necessary if we hope to see the Humanities continue to be valued on college campuses nation- wide.

Let the Great World Spin

Colum McCann is the author of a novel entitled “Let the Great World Spin,” a text which uses a circular mode of narrative to depict the cultural strife of the United States during the 1970s. For a people dealing with the struggles of military losses in Vietnam, the continued rise of capitalism, and new concepts of racial and cultural relations, the image of a man walking a tightrope between the monumental parallel columns of the Twin Towers was a symbol of hope for an emotionally unsure, unbalanced, and insecure nation.


I thought often of the conventions of this text as I read the essays of both Parker and Horner. Both emphasize the importance of an historical perspective for modern day composition. They fear the repercussions of an uneducated generation, of a generation with no foundation. Through an historical lens, both authors detail the changes which the English language, the university system, and composition as a whole have undergone to position us in the location which we, as students, are familiar with today. Take for instance Bain’s modes which have greatly influenced the modern ideas of composition practiced in classrooms today. Though to claim the modes is considered taboo, the recognition of our practice of the modes is a necessity. No composition education would be complete without knowledge of Description, Narration, Persuasion, Argument, and Research. Knowledge of how Ethos, Pathos, and Logos have combined with the modes is also a requirement of a well-grounded foundation in composition. Such change is evident, and to believe that progress in any discipline is unnecessary is futile. Evolution is also a key component of the McCann text. Within the text the author emphasizes the need for individual growth and change and the hope for future generations which comes with the transformation process. Changes in curriculum, such as the acceptance of a wide variety of composition mediums, are important if academic success is truly the primary goal of English departments.

P.S.

All this discussion of “change” makes me wonder—how would Alfred Lord Tennyson, who wrote the line “Let the great world spin forever down the ringing grooves of change” in his poem “Locksley Hall,” feel about Poetry being thrown out as one of Bain’s modes?

Composition is Not a One-Way Street

Louise Rosenblatt is a renowned Educational theorist, and her “Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing” is a staple component of pedagogical thought within Language Arts, Literature, and English courses. Rosenblatt believes that meaning is only developed through didactic discourse between a reader and a text. She states that “reading always implies both a reader and a text in a reciprocal relationship” (Rosenblatt X). The text alone is merely words on a page, but it is the reader’s experiences with the surrounding world which are applied to the textual images that allow for the development of individual comprehension. Rosenblatt believes that the same is true in regards to writing. Writers utilize their background knowledge, as well as grammatical structure, tone, style, and other classical components of the written word, in forming works which communicate their thoughts to an audience. However, a reader’s interpretation can always differ from an author’s because no two people will be influenced by outside social and cultural interactions in the same manner.


When attempting to define “Composition,” I look back on Louise Rosenblatt’s concepts. In the Composition course I took as an undergraduate, students are required to write essays and edit them, turning the pieces into communicative works which fit the generalized boundaries required by Academia. I believe that Composition is much more than proscribed rules and standards, though those are at times necessary elements. Composition is a means of effective communication, such as email, a blog, a movie, or even the highly acclaimed essay. The key to mastering Composition is knowing when to use the proper medium and being prepared to use the appropriate language and style for the audience or reader with whom one is attempting to converse. The most positive type of Composition is one in which self reflection, inter-textual communication, and grammatical concepts meld themselves together, creating a piece which is meaningful to the author, informative/entertaining to the reader, and decipherable in a way that allows the audience to connect to the piece in their own way as well.

When Louise Rosenblatt penned her Transactional Theory in 1938, there is no way that she could have imagined the influence it would have on the Academic community or readers and writers as a whole. She highlights the inherent need for readers to connect themselves to what they read and write, the importance of reflecting on these topics, and the necessity of societal and cultural interaction which allow for the broadening of individual experiences. Her beliefs are the building blocks for modern day Composition. Without them the growing willingness to accept a wide range of communicative processes outside of the traditional modality would not exist. In essence, Composition is the didactic tug of war between personal, outside experience and the written word that Louise Rosenblatt discusses. The process is a two-way discourse, not a one-way street. It is a process which works to help authors and readers define themselves, each other, and the world around them.







Works Cited

Rosenblatt, Louise. Making Meaning with Texts. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 2005.

---. ““The Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing,” Theoretical Models and Processes of

Reading.” Rosenblatt 1-37.