Berlin here continues his unique history of American college com-position begun in his Writing Instruction in Nineteenth-Century Colleges (1984), turning now to the twentieth century.In discussing the variety of rhetorics that have been used in writ-ing classrooms Berlin introduces a taxonomy made up of three cate-gories: objective rhetorics, subjective rhetorics, and transactional rhetorics, which are distinguished by the epistemology on which each is based. He makes clear that these categories are not tied to a chronology but instead are to be found in the English department in one form or another during each decade of the century.His historical treatment includes an examination of the formation of the English department, the founding of the NCTE and its role in writing instruction, the training of teachers of writing, the effects of progressive education on writing instruction, the General Education Movement, the appearance of the CCCC, the impact of Sputnik, and today's literacy crisis.

Drawing upon previously unpublished archival materials as well as historical accounts, Gere traces the history of writing groups in America, from their origins over a century ago to their recent reappearance in the works of Macrorie, Elbow, Murray, and others.From this historical perspective Gere examines the theoretical foundations of writing groups, challenging the traditional concept of writing as an individual performance. She offers instead a broader view of authorship that includes both individual and social dimensions, with implications not only for the teaching of composition but also for theories of rhetoric and literacy.

Blending a complete writing-about-literature text, a literature anthology, and a handbook into one, this distinctive book guides students through the allied processes of critical reading and writing -- illustrating the use of writing as a way of studying literature, and providing students with all of the tools necessary to analyze literature on their own. The text promotes interactive learning by integrating writing instruction with the study of literature. NEW to this edition: *Arguing and interpretation guidelines *Additional casebooks *Updated and expanded Companion Website -- the addition of a Writing About Literature section, interactive timeline, author photos, easy navigational bar, information on literary theory We are delighted to offer select Penguin Putnam titles at a substantial discount to your students when you request a special package of one or more Penguin titles with any Prentice Hall text. Contact your Prentice Hall sales representative for special ordering instructions. www.turnitin.com -- This new online resource is now available free to professors using Literature and the Writing Process, Sixth Edition. Turnitin.com, formerly Plagiarism.org, is a powerful tool to help instructors identify and prevent student plagiarism on the Web.

This is a book about reading, writing, and teaching and the ways each can be imagined as composition. The authors bring together eight years of teaching and research connected with the integrated basic reading and writing course developed at the University of Pittsburgh. The approach offered here--widely discussed in professional journals--has been tested at several universities, as well as at the high school level.

Preview this article: College Anthologies of Readings and Assumptions About Literacy, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/37/2/collegecompositionandcommunication11241-1.gif

Preview this article: Alliance for Literacy: Teaching Non-native Speakers and Speakers of Nonstandard English Together, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/35/4/collegecompositionandcommunication14861-1.gif

In 1980-1981, a new requirement of a junior course in went into force at the College Park campus of the University of Maryland. The course was created by the University to ensure that future UM graduates would be more literate and more articulate than recent graduates. The staff of the new course chose to meet the University's goal by giving the course a strong technical writing or professional writing emphasis. The course is taught (with English Department supervision) by professors from every division of the University, and by professionals in many fields (from law to veterinary medicine) from the Washington, D.C. area. Students write papers using subject matter from their intended professions, and they are graded on their ability to make that subject matter clear to students (semi-professionals) in other disciplines. This new junior course has led those of us who teach the freshman course to seriously reconsider what we are teaching. Since our course has shifted from independent to sequential status, we naturally feel some anxiety about possible new restrictions, but we also see the change as an opportunity to think through, more systematically, some crucial issues-what to teach, where to begin and end, and what theories should be guiding our discussion and analysis. We have decided that setting limits on content in the freshman course on the grounds that what we teach might be repeated in the later course would be counter-productive. Students, especially at the college level, should be tested, prodded, and stretched to their limits. Moreover, we-and the students-ought to be able to see a second course not as repetition, but as welcome practice. William Irmscher has reminded us (in Teaching Expository Writing) that better is largely a matter of better-educated intuition, and that better-educated intuition comes from repeated practice in reading and writing. We all know studies like the Dartmouth study reported by Albert Kitzhaber in Themes, Theories, and Therapy (p. 109), which show that

Professor Petrosky's review of Problem-Solving Strategies for Writing raises one crucial question I think a review of a writing text should raise: what theoretical assumptions about the psychology of writing underlie this book? However, he uses the occasion to attack an out-moded, logical positivist version of communication theory that treats thought as an object to be transferred and that ignores the constructive nature of both reading and writing. I am perplexed that he reads my book as an example of this position-a position which neither of us holds. communication model, with its senders and receivers, which he attributes to me is, in the book, in fact attributed to its real source (electrical engineers-the work of Shannon and Weaver in the 1940's). I present the model as a familiar but inadequate metaphor the reader will want to go beyond (We often talk about communication as if it were a physical process One problem with this model is that it turns the writer into a delivery boy. .. . This model, however, has a limitation ..). In context, the main function of the two-page passage he cites so extensively was to challenge that very model and to introduce a ten-page section entitled The Creative Reader, which draws on current research describing the constructive nature of reading. Just as writers work with metaphor, intuition, and images, as well as logic, in order to compose, readers likewise build rich and sometimes surprisingly original internal structures in their effort to comprehend. Although Professor Petrosky and I clearly differ on how to write a textbook-on what ideas to value, on how explicit one should try to be about thinking processes-I do not believe that my position or the book itself fits into the unattractive pigeonhole he has in mind. As a teacher, I see no contradiction at all between fostering the experience of discovery, of listening to readers, of reseeing one's own ideas-things we all value and teach towardand asking students to bring a more self-conscious, problem-solving approach to their writing. I have difficulty imagining any serious teacher who would. premise which underlies my commitment to teaching heuristics is that writing is not a rule-governed act; nor is it so essentially mysterious that little can be said about it or taught. My goal is to offer students a repertoire of alternative strategies for dealing with this complex process. Trying to be articulate about the thinking processes you would teach may be risky, but I think it is necessary. In taking a strategic approach to writing, one offers writers some of the power that comes from an awareness of one's own thinking processes and a sense of options. Our discipline is growing in the depth and diversity of its theories. If we

Preview this article: Philosophy as Literacy: Teaching College Students to Read Critically and Write Cogently, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/34/1/collegecompositionandcommunication15295-1.gif

Preview this article: Perspectives on Legacies and Literacy in the 1980s, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/33/3/collegecompositionandcommunication15839-1.gif

Preview this article: From Story To Essay: Reading and Writing, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/33/1/collegecompositionandcommunication15864-1.gif

Preview this article: A Survey of Undergraduate Reading and Writing Needs, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/28/2/collegecompositioncommunication16388-1.gif

ANY EFFORT to influence the quality of student writing must draw on an understanding of why students write as they do. When it comes to writing in response to texts-to analyzing works of fiction or non-fiction-it would seem that a pedagogic model designed to influence the student's output must first come to grips with the way in which the text is read and how the information is processed by the student prior to the act of writing itself.

Preview this article: The Student's View of the Text: Implications for Reading and Writing, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/26/4/collegecompositionandcommunication17083-1.gif

Preview this article: Improving Reading and Writing Skills of Disadvantaged College Freshmen, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/18/2/collegecompositioncommunication20946-1.gif

From Literacy to Literature: The Pedagogical Use of Linguistics, College Composition and Communication, Vol. 8, No. 3, General Session, Panel, and Workshop Reports. Conference on College Composition and Communication, 1957 (Oct., 1957), pp. 135-136