This article is a case study of a small controversy involving a 1983 government research report on gender biases in naval officer fitness reports. The research at issue indicated that male commanding officers customarily wrote differently in naval fitness reports about women than in fitness reports they wrote about men, and the researchers concluded that the commanding officers needed to change their writing habits. But the objectivity of the researchers was soon challenged. In this survey of the controversy, the writing of several groups—male commanding officers, female naval officers, male newspaper editors, and female personnel researchers—is both illustrated and critiqued. The main focus here is rhetorical credibility in professional communications when gender is the issue at hand.

This article describes the patterns of literacy development in children froms table home environments who were prenatally exposed to crack or cocaine. The article includes a brief overview of observations from the first year of study followed by a focus on patterns of development observed during Year Two. During the second year, the children continued to develop in what is considered to be an age appropriate manner, with onlys even children receiving special education support. A few children experienced setbacks in their learning, but there seemed to be reasonable causes for these setbacks. During this secondy ear, the importance of classroom context, as established by the teacher, became an important aspect in the literacy developmeont this group of children. The article concludes with one case study highlighting the importance of classroom context in a child’s literacy development.

Current social perspectives on writing and disciplinary enculturation are generally grounded in theories of discourse communities. Although assumptions underlying these theories have been seriously questioned, few studies of situated writing have applied alternate theories. In this article, I explore a sociohistoric notion of disciplinarity in a case study of how a sociology student's dissertation prospectus is negotiated in a graduate seminar. A microhistorical narrative of a response episode in the seminar and subsequent textual revision is contextualized in histories of local activity. Analysis of the seminar response foregrounds emergent, nonlinear, discursively heterogeneous practices of disciplinary sense-making. Analysis of the text foregrounds practices whereby situated histories of textual production and reception are transformed into purified representations of the discipline and the author. Finally, the analysis details how the disciplinary work of revision in this setting was socially distributed and interactively achieved.

Based on a year-long ethnographic study, this article presents a case study of a fourth-grade student, Kenya, who learned to participate in the literacy community of her classroom—in her terms “to be good”—by writing letters. It was through these letters, which began as daily written interactions about (mis)behavior, that Kenya gained confidence and skill as a writer. The genre of letters allowed Kenya to construct her identity as a writer in the classroom community, at the same time that she retained her identity as a member of a group of four, frequently defiant African American girls. In this classroom, teachers used writing to forge collaborative relationships with students—relationships that often were built around struggle and conflict—to encourage students' growth as writers. This study has implications for a new pedagogy of writing, one that provides a rich and challenging curriculum for all students, even those who might in other circumstances be considered “remedial,” and one which alters our conceptions of the roles of and relationships between teachers and students in a writing classroom.

This stimulating and refreshing study, written by one of the leading commentators in the field, provides novel answers to these crucial questions. What's Wrong With Ethnography provides a fresh look at the rationale for and distinctiveness of ethnographic research in sociology, education and related fields, and succeeds in slaying a number of currently fashionable sacred cows. Relativism, critical theory, the uniqueness of the case study and the distinction between qualitative and quantitative research are all examined and found wanting as a basis for informed ethnography. The policy and political implications of ethnography are a particular focus of attention. The author compels the reader to reexamine some basic methodological assumptions in an exciting way, Martin Bulmer, London School of Economics.

The customary approach to classifying multiple audiences for written discourse is to recognize primary, secondary, and immediate audiences, and, in some cases, gatekeeping audiences. Based on findings from an ethnographic case study of engineering authors in an R&D setting, this article suggests that authors should also attend to watchdog audiences as they write. A watchdog audience pays close attention to the written transaction between the author and the primary audience. Authors must direct their discourse toward the primary audience, but they must also keep the motives and purposes of the watchdog audience in mind as they write and revise. The watchdog audience in my case study, while it had no direct leverage or other organizational power over the authors, still influenced the authors extensively as they revised their text. Evidence indicates that, beyond the apparent and traditional sources of power, there are more contextual, hidden, socially mediated power relationships equally capable of shaping written discourse.

This article describes the design and evaluation of a formal writing assessment program within a technical writing course. Our purpose in this base-line study was to evaluate student writing at the conclusion of the course. In implementing this evaluation, we addressed fundamental issues of sound assessment: reliability and validity. Our program may encourage others seeking to assess educational outcomes in technical writing courses.

Two widely disseminated approaches impose reductive boundaries on ethnographic research by privileging one context of meaning over other essential contexts. The first, emphasizing statistical validity, privileges the research community by recommending that the ethnographer's data analysis via coding agree with that of other raters from the research community. The second asserts that the ethnographer who comes closest to validity comes closest to presenting only the subject's point of view. Ethnography, however, comprises four essential, overlapping contexts: the phenomenal context (that which is observed/recorded), the site's cultural context (the subjects' outlook), the research community context, and the researcher's interior context, shaped by experience and education. Each of the four vantages has dominating tendencies, but if one does dominate to the exclusion of others, the reductive result is data-centered, thin description; subjects-centered groupthink; research community-centered groupthink; or researchercentered solipsism. Although all contexts of meaning are important, none should fully eclipse the others.

This longitudinal study examines the reading processes and practices of one college student, Eliza, through eight semesters of undergraduate postsecondary education. Specifically, the study traces the development of this student's beliefs about literate activity—focusing not only on changes in her reading and writing activities per se, but also on her views about those activities, her representations of the nature of texts, and her understanding of the relationship between knowledge and written discourse within her disciplinary field of biology. Multiple data sources—including extended interviews, reading/writing logs, observations and field notes, texts, and read-and-think-aloud protocols—were used to explore Eliza's rhetorical development over her 4 college years. Results of various analyses together suggest that Eliza's conceptions of the function of texts and the role of authors—both as authors and as scientists—grew in complexity. A number of possibly interrelated factors may account for Eliza's expanding notions of authors and of texts: increased subject matter knowledge, instructional support, “natural” development, and mentoring in an internship situation.

This investigation sought to determine how the active meaning-making process of 10 sixth-grade students with above average reading and writing ability was reflected in their written responses to four books of realistic fiction. Students kept literature response journals to record their ongoing thoughts and reflections during the reading process. The nine-point categorization scheme that emerged from the content of students’ responses was used to analyze the journals of 4 of these students in order to determine individual response styles. Further analysis revealed the sequence of response for these 4 students during each quarter of their reading and writing. The study suggests how complex and unique response to literature is for even upper elementary and middle school students

This article argues for an activity-based theory of genre knowledge. Drawing on empirical findings from case study research emphasizing “insider knowledge” and on structuration theory, activity theory, and rhetorical studies, the authors propose five general principles for genre theory: (a) Genres are dynamic forms that mediate between the unique features of individual contexts and the features that recur across contexts; (b) genre knowledge is embedded in communicative activities of daily and professional life and is thus a form of “situated cognition”; (c) genre knowledge embraces both form and content, including a sense of rhetorical appropriateness; (d) the use of genres simultaneously constitutes and reproduces social structures; and (e) genre conventions signal a discourse community's norms, epistemology, ideology, and social ontology.

The entry of ethnography and ethnographic methods into writing research, particularly during the 1980s, has been highly productive. However, this research continues to ignore many of the doubts concerning ethnography that anthropologists themselves have been raising for a number of years. This article (a) outlines more than a decade of civil war among anthropologists, (b) considers the relevance of that debate to writing researchers working ethnographically, (c) argues for more experimental ethnographic texts in contrast to the entrenched models that currently rule the field and despite the institutional resistance that experimental texts are bound to generate, and (d) suggests in cursory fashion the fate of “postmodernist” discourse in the context of the more normative discourse of institutional life. Along the way, the article analyzes some of the rhetoric of the ethnographic work of writing researchers, including Heath's Ways With Words.

The case method of teaching is increasingly utilized as a tool for the teaching of business communication and technical writing. In addition to providing students with meaningful exposure to actual companies and written products, the use of cases challenge students to assume one or many various positions within an organization where effective communication with myriad publics is essential in meeting organizational goals and objectives.

This study reworks the concept of genre from rhetorical, dialectical, and dialogic perspectives. From these perspectives, genre is redefined as a stabilized-for-now or stabilized-enough site of social and ideological action. This definition is then applied to a specific literacy practice—medical record keeping—evolving in a specific context—a veterinary college. Data were gathered during a 6-month ethnographic study of the college. The larger research project focused on the teaching and learning practices that constituted literacy, i.e., the ways of speaking, reading, writing, and listening characteristics of veterinary medicine. The project consisted of interviews, observation, and document collection. Triangulation was achieved both within and between methods. Data were analyzed using Glaser and Strauss's “grounded theory” techniques. When the concept of genre is applied to medical record keeping, the complexity of this literacy practice becomes apparent. A specific record-keeping system—the Problem Oriented Veterinary Medical Record (POVMR) system—was the site of intense controversy at the college. The system articulated a set of values that one group of faculty and clinicians espoused and another group rejected. The system itself was embedded in the exam structure of the college, and a good deal of evidence emerged that the POVMR itself was promoting certain types of literacy abilities and making others less likely.

My other self-as he might be called in a brief, ambiguous novelwas in this instance a bush pilot several hundred feet above Third Matagamon Lake, face to face with a strong winter wind. The plane was a Super Cub, scarcely large enough for the two of us. We sat in tandem and talked through an intercom. There is a lot of identification, even transformation, in the work I do-moving along from place to place, person to person, as a reporter, a writer, repeatedly trying to sense another existence and in some ways to share it. Never had that been more true than now, in part because he was sitting there with my life in his hands while placing (in another way) his life in mine. (249)

The purpose of this study was to examine how different writing tasks influence students’ thinking in reading and writing. The tasks used in this study, writing either a report or a problem-based essay, required students to integrate prior knowledge with information from six sources in order to create their own texts. The 15 undergraduates, enrolled in a seminar on European history, were randomly assigned to one of two task conditions, report or problem. Analyses focused on students’ acquisition of topic knowledge and the ways writers structured meaning as they organized and selected information. For insights into how writers approached these two tasks, all students provided think-aloud protocols and kept reading-writing logs. Classroom observations also provided information about contextual factors that can influence the strategies students use in reading to create their own texts. Comparisons made between the two groups revealed that they differed significantly in their interpretations of the two tasks and in their approaches to restructuring information from sources. However, there was no difference between the amount of prior knowledge that students writing reports and problem-based essays included in their essays, nor were there differences in learning. Both groups of students improved their understanding of a given historical event. Possible directions for future research are discussed.

The style of discourse underlying writing instruction in this country, which has been termed essayist literacy by Scollon and Scollon and others, is grounded historically and culturally in the development of Western civilization. This style of discourse is the register of English used in academic situations, and it also has been found to be characteristic of some educated (especially male) mainstream speakers in other contexts. Because this register often differs from the naturally acquired discourse styles of students from nonmainstream groups, many such students face difficulties in writing instruction that mainstream students do not face. Given the importance of the essayist literacy register in this society, it is important (a) to make the characteristics of this discourse style explicit in order to increase the likelihood that writing instruction will be clear and available to all students, and (b) to learn about other discourse styles that are already known and used by students from a range of communities. A conceptual framework from the ethnography of communication is presented for studying verbal performances in different cultural contexts, and two examples of persuasive oral performances from ongoing research among Mexican immigrants are analyzed within this framework.

This study explores the assumption that writing is a way to learn by examining the influence of task interpretation on writing and studying as learning aids. Forty college freshmen performed two tasks: reading-to-write and reading-to-study. Approaches to each task were categorized to test for effects of task interpretation. Students answered passage-specific comprehension questions after each task and gave think-aloud protocols as they worked. To assess learning processes, protocol transcripts were analyzed using a taxonomy of cognitive operations. Writing led to lower scores than studying on two of four comprehension measures. Writing and studying led to different patterns of cognitive operations when students worked with a fact-based source passage, but (a) these differences interacted with task interpretation, and (b) virtually no effects of task were observed on a more abstract passage. Results indicate that task interpretation and the nature of the material to be learned are important mediating variables in the relationship between writing and learning.

Previous research in computer-mediated communication in both the classroom and the workplace has found that patterns of interaction may differ between individuals communicating face-to-face versus communicating via a computer network. This present study, using a case study methodology, sought to analyze and compare the language of groups of business writing students as they communicated both face-to-face and on a real-time computer network. The study found that during network meetings, participation was more equal, responses tended to be more substantive and text specific, and students were more willing to offer direction than during face-to-face meetings. In addition, students reported a more positive evaluation of their network sessions.

This essay presents a critical case study of how shifts in the style and genre of written communication both reflect and influence historical shifts in political consciousness and action. The field of study is the discourse of environmental advocacy. With increased public support for actions that would forestall environmental degradation, environmental politics has diversified. Formerly a resistance movement directed toward influencing large-scale governmental or industrial actions through the rhetoric of polemical dispute, environmentalism has evolved into several distinct approaches, including a globalist movement and a grass roots movement that share an interest in policy and procedure, the traditional topics of instrumental discourse. A new genre built upon this proactive attitude—the green how-to book—currently dominates the popular literature on environmental problem solving. Capitalizing on the document designs of technical communication, these manuals recommend courses of action ranging from fixing the Environmental Protection Agency to fixing the toilet; they are directed to audiences ranging from the President of the United States to the ordinary householder. They have in common an attempt to break the paralysis of fear associated with realizations about the scale of environmental damage. But—because the instrumental genre tends to obscure relations of agent, action, and effect—covert political agendas may pass unnoticed into the personalist politics of the new literature.

This study evaluated a method for teaching writers to anticipate readers' comprehension needs. The method, called reader-protocol teaching, involves asking writers to predict readers' problems with a text and then providing them with detailed readers' responses (in the form of think-aloud protocol transcripts) to illustrate how readers construct an understanding of the text. Writers in five experimental classes critiqued a set of ten poorly written instructional texts and then analyzed the protocol transcripts of readers struggling to comprehend these texts. Writers in five control classes were taught to anticipate the reader's needs through a variety of audience-analysis heuristics and collaborative peer-response methods. Pretests and posttests were used to assess improvements in experimental and control writers' ability to anticipate and diagnose readers' comprehension problems. Pretest and posttest materials were expository science texts. Writers taught with the reader-protocol teaching method improved significantly more than did writers in control classes in the number of readers' problems they accurately predicted. In addition, in contrast to writers in control classes, writers taught with the reader-protocol method significantly increased in their ability to (a) diagnose readers' problems caused by textual omissions, (b) characterize problems from the reader's perspective, and (c) attend to global-text problems. Moreover, writers' knowledge of audience acquired in one domain (instructional text) transferred to another (expository science text).

Preview this article: On Blocking and Unblocking Sonja: A Case Study in Two Voices, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ccc/43/1/collegecompositionandcommunication8895-1.gif

This article, based on a year-long project in an urban K/1 classroom offers a case study of a young child who used school writing activities to perform rather than simply to communicate. A performer differs from a mere communicator in both the nature of language produced and in the kind of stance taken toward an audience. Although the child's language resources contributed to his success with written language, they did not always fit comfortably into the “writing workshop” used in his classroom; in fact, his assumptions about written language and texts conflicted in revealing ways with those undergirding a workshop approach. Thus, the study helps make explicit many unexamined assumptions of current written language pedagogies, particularly those involving the nature of literary sense, the relationship between writers' “audience” and their “helpers,” and most important, the links between oral performance, literacy pedagogy, and the use of the explicit, analytic language valued in school.

To make informed decisions about ethical issues, technical communicators need to understand how to apply general ethical principles to the kinds of dilemmas they will face routinely, concerning such issues as plagiarism, trade secrets, and misrepresentation of text and graphics. This article reviews the controversy about the relationship between ethics and rhetoric among the Greeks, provides basic definitions of ethics, and applies the literature of business and professional ethics to the concerns of technical communicators and other professionals who communicate, showing how they must think through the conflicts of obligations to their employer, the public, and the environment. It provides a case study that can be used to reinforce a student's understanding of the relationship between technical communication and ethics.

This Qualitative study sought to determine whether four high- and four low-apprehensive first-year college writers responded differently as peer evaluators of writing in a face-to-face group versus a group that communicated via an electronic-mail network. An analysis of recorded group “conversations” revealed that high apprehensives exhibited different strategies than low apprehensives for informing group members about writing during both face-to-face and e-mail sessions. Furthermore, high apprehensives during e-mail sessions participated more and offered more directions for revision than during face-to-face meetings. When revising subsequent to group meetings, high apprehensives reported relying more on group comments received during e-mail sessions than group comments received during face-to-face sessions.

To explore how writers with extensive experience and learning in an academic discipline used both topical and rhetorical knowledge to construct synthesis essays, 40 graduate students equally representing the two disciplines of psychology and business wrote synthesis essays on either supply-side economics or rehearsal in memory. Half of the writers completed think-aloud protocols, and their composing processes were analyzed for different qualities and frequencies of elaborations and rhetorical awareness and for task representation. Their written products (40 essays) were analyzed for the importance and origin of information and for the quality of key rhetorical moves. Analyses of variance revealed that high-knowledge writers evidenced more local and evaluative elaborations as well as an awareness of rhetorical contexts. They also included more new information in their essays in the top levels of essay organizations. Low-knowledge writers elaborated less but did rely on structural and content-based awareness to compose, factors which also were influenced by specific topics and disciplines, and they included comparable amounts of borrowedimplicit information in their essays. Intercorrelations of process and product features revealed that evaluative elaborations and awareness of rhetorical context corresponded with the presence of new information in essays for all 40 writers, suggesting that prior knowledge of an academic topic may take the form of a complex, situational strategy for composing. The findings confirm the interrelatedness of comprehension and composing processes and illustrate how writers, with varying levels of topic familiarity, use both their knowledge of disciplinary topics and their experience as readers and writers to compose synthesis essays.

Through the use of case study portraits, this article examines naturally occurring one-to-one writing conference conversations between a ninth-grade English teacher and three students in his class. Suggesting a broadened model of effective writing conference instruction, the article considers composing processes that appear to be privileged in the conference context when different students are learning to write. The focus is on the dialogic nature of markedly contrasting conversations, demonstrating that while dialogue wears many guises and while the give and take between teacher and student can be fleeting and “forgettable,” the conversational context contributes to a deliberative process critical to the process of composing. Methodology for the research on which this article is based drew on ethnographic techniques combined with discourse analysis of writing conference conversation.

Preview this article: Writing Ethnography: Representation, Rhetoric, and Institutional Practices, Page 1 of 1 < Previous page | Next page > /docserver/preview/fulltext/ce/53/3/collegeenglish9585-1.gif

The authors recount their attempt to analyze a case study in terms of two conflicting rhetorics: a collectivist rhetoric that values most the contributions individuals make to an ongoing collective project and an individualist rhetoric that values most the original and autonomous voice. These two rhetorics conflict in the experience of one writer working concurrently in a literature seminar within a university English department and in the public relations office of a reproductive services agency. This conflict, centering on different rhetorical ethics, had less to do with competence than with commitment: the writer's commitment to the individualist ethics practiced in the writing she did in the literature seminar prevented her from valuing the writing she did at the agency that worked toward a collectivist end. The authors then examine how this analysis is problematized by alternative interpretations of this case that demonstrate that the collectivist rhetoric practiced by researchers and theorists of writing itself involves the interaction of conflicting individualist assertions. This analysis suggests that the most useful theoretical insights any case might provide into the question of how writing ought to be taught are embodied in the exchange of interpretations that case provokes and in the confrontation of diverse arguments that emerge from that exchange.

The visual dimension of meaning is widely accepted in technical communication. But theories (and pedagogies) that direct the making of visual meaning are still under development. A guidelines approach, a design decisions approach, and an information/reader model approach are applied as lenses for viewing the marking of meaning on an instructional page. A case study invokes these approaches to describe the visual markers students employ as they write descriptive and instructional text. Although neither group described marked their texts thoroughly, beginning technical writing majors enrolled in a writing class used fewer illustrations and visual markers than technical majors used. The difference in beginning students' performance may be due to prior reading patterns, since the difference is more pronounced in the descriptions than in the instructions. Thus, the paper proposes a longitudinal approach to sensitizing writing majors to visual cues.

This qualitative study examined the transitions that writers make when moving from academic to professional discourse communities. Subjects were six university seniors enrolled in a special “writing internship course” in which they discussed and analyzed the writing they were doing in 12-week professional internships at corporations, small businesses, and public service agencies in a major metropolitan area. Participant-observer and case-study data included drafts and final copies of all writing that the interns produced on the job (including texts and suggested revisions by other employees), an ethnographic log of data and speculations arising from the group discussions, written course journals from each intern, transcriptions of taped, discourse-based and general interviews with the interns, and a final 15-page retrospective analysis of each intern's writing on the job. Results showed a remarkably consistent pattern of expectation, frustration, and accommodation as the interns adjusted to their new writing communities. The results have important implications for the lateral and vertical transfer of writing skills across different communicative contexts.

What is the role of interaction, or, more generally, orality, in multiple-audience analysis and adaptation? How does orality relate to literacy in the evolution of corporate documents? A qualitative study of how seven engineers in two divi sions of a large corporation wrote for multiple audiences revealed that, in the more rhetorically successful cases observed, interaction was the central means of analyzing and adapting discourse to multiple audiences, fulfilling rhetorical and social goals, and building and sustaining a corporate culture; and orality was more potent than literacy in the engineers'composing behavior and the au diences' acceptance of the engineers' ideas and documents.

Linguists and philosophers have traditionally argued that definite constructions presuppose familiarity on the part of the addressee. This article examines empirically the question of what kind of familiarity, in the context of newspaper editorials, this might be. A significant issue, articulated by literacy theorist Walter Ong, is the nature of the reader and whether a writer can know what a reader is familiar with. Taking a case study approach, the author examines definite constructions in 15 editorial articles from the Christian Science Monitor. These constructions are classified, following Brown and Yule (1983), as either re-evoking, new, or inferrable. It is argued that for purposes of studying the writer-reader relationship, the inferrables are most interesting since they indicate what the writer believes the reader is capable of inferring. Ultimately both the new and the inferrable show that writers use definite constructions in accord with genre conventions. The author concludes that such conventions make communication efficient.

Because of the recent emphasis on rhetorical context in business and technical writing (BTW) instruction, the problem-solving case has become a staple in BTW classrooms. However, a number of critics have voiced concerns about the use of the rhetorical case. These concerns recall an ancient debate among Roman rhetoricians over an early case-study method called declamation. For contemporary theorists, the debate over case study revolves around its value as a stimulant to problem-solving skills, its ability to imitate the realistic circumstances of professional BTW, and its emphasis on persona and audience along with its deemphasis of the teacher. A full spectrum of arguments on these and other issues in the case-study debate indicates that the discipline is entering a new phase in its deliberations over the role of problem-solving and pragmatics in the BTW classroom.

A qualitative study using reading protocols suggests that when readers of informative documents understand conveyed information satisfactorily, they make direct confirmations and positive comprehension evaluations. When readers are uncertain about the accuracy of their understanding, they guess, make assumptions, or render the text's language into their own words. When readers' understanding is impaired, they ask for more clearly established links or relationships in the text, or they pinpoint some ambiguity or lack of resolution. When readers' understanding is unsatisfactory but not impaired, they request additional information. In addition, readers make evaluative suggestions that introduce, focus, emphasize, or reiterate their other comprehension-related responses. The response patterns isolated in this qualitative study indicate the need for specific quantitative research and suggest some directions for developing reader-based heuristics for informative writing.

The environmental impact statement (EIS) was created by the National Environmental Policy Act in 1969 as a means of ensuring careful study of possible effects on the environment of projects involving public lands and as an aid to effective decisions regarding such projects. This article presents a case study involving the reading of several EISs produced by one government agency, the Bureau of Land Management. An analysis of these documents reveals that, to answer the leading question of rhetoricians in the field of technical writing—Is the document effective?—we must consider the social and cultural context of the EIS as well as the characteristics of the text, its organization and style. Simple notions of purpose and audience are ruled out. We must account for pragmatics as well as syntactics and semantics. The very category of “effectiveness” is conditioned by the historical and political forces that shape the EIS. An approach through genre theory is recommended.

Modern professionals commonly write documents to be signed by superiors, but are seldom taught how to do this. If students are successfully to fulfill everyday organizational writing tasks, they must learn to master skills of impersonating viewpoint, style and even personality. To teach such skills, we can adapt the ancient exercise of prosopopoeia or impersonation, either by varying the personas of standard textbook exercises, or by making use of the technical writing case study, or by having students impersonate professionals who were involved in famous (or infamous) current events.

A current assumption is that “one best system” can be devised to develop and test user documentation. In-house documentation, however, demands approaches that do not fit into a generic system. Specifically, an in-house manual needs a special type of usability testing, one that measures if and how a manual is used to meet the goals of its organization. Along with quality testing, in-house writers must also run studies on how their manuals actually function in the workplace. This article describes a three-pronged design for actual use testing: user logs; observations; and surveys. In my case study, this testing revealed that users did not use their manuals for reasons other than quality — for instance, reliance on social interactions for acquiring information. My findings show that writing an effective manual requires more than composing skills; it demands writers' involvement in the organizational dynamics that motivate workers to use or not use their manuals.

Field study, using an ethnographic approach, offers a potentially powerful methodology for the technical communication researcher, a methodology that provides a useful balance to the strengths and weaknesses of experiments and surveys. Technical communication studies, however, exhibit not only the typical constraints of field research but several additional constraints inherent to research conducted on-the-job in business, industry, and government, which deserve consideration when designing research.

Donald Graves has achieved wide recognition for propounding a method for teaching elementary students how to write that stresses unstructured expression of personal experiences. He uses his case study of sixteen New Hampshire children as a research base providing proof of the efficacy of this method. However, his observations from this study qualify as reportage more than research. The work of the Graves team in New Hampshire represents a demonstration of teaching ideas that work well under favorable circumstances. Because he never considers negative evidence for the hypotheses he is testing, his work does not constitute research.

This essay examines narrative choices in experimental (interpretive) and traditional (analytical) ethnographies. The material covered includes probability in quantitative and qualitative research; ethnographic narratives as ways of knowing and telling about the world; perspective as a consequence of both narrative stance and narrative voice; and the economics of producing interpretations and analyses in academic prose. Underlying the argument is the assumption that decisions ethnographers make about what to tell and how to tell it are influenced by to whom they plan to tell it and under what circumstances. Hence the ethnographer's narrative dilemma glosses over the epistomological crisis that authorship raises for the social sciences, namely, whether the researcher or the research method is telling the story.

This article presents a rationale for studying collaborative writing and evidence that coauthors can learn about the writing process from each other. Collaborative writing is explored as an instructional activity that can help students expand their repertoire of writing strategies and their mastery of written communication skills. Collaborative writing activities also offer researchers new insights into the writing process. This discussion about collaborative writing is followed by a case study of two coauthors in the fourth grade who represent general findings from a larger study of 43 fourth- and fifth-grade writers. Detailed analyses of the composing sessions, individual texts, collaborative texts, and interviews indicate that coauthors share creative input, evaluative perspectives, composing strategies, and notions about “good writing” when they work together. Collaborative writing, thus, can complement instruction because it is a direct—albeit subtle—form of learning.

To develop an insider's perspective as to what teachers employ in their efforts to translate instructional theory into occasions for learning, this study represents teachers' perspectives in a way that ( 1 ) identifies some of the legitimate and unexpected resistance to implementing new curriculum, and (2) suggests an analytic model of theoretical and practical value to those interested in curriculum implementation. Two high school teachers collaborated with the researcher to develop writing tasks that would encourage careful thought and learning on the part of the students. Both teachers were observed before and during the time they developed and implemented these writing tasks. On the basis of the field notes and interview transcripts, an analytic model was developed and used to: 1. characterize a single meaning system here defined as a curricular system of meaning; and 2. identify several natural sources of resistance to innovation. The discussion focuses specifically on two components of this meaning system: (a) locus of attention here defined as a critical point of balance in the system which enables the teacher to negotiate a number of delicately balanced and sometimes conflicting concerns, and (b) of instruction, defined as the underlying conditions that influence instructional practice. These conditions include the teacher's conceptions about the source of knowledge, the development of knowledge, and the goals of instruction. Evidence cited suggests that these two concerns are crucial to the effective and efficient working of a system, and that both are thus natural sources of resistance. A number of factors have contributed to the recent interest in writing across the curriculum. Among them is our developing understanding of the relationship between writing and thinking. Work by Emig (1977, 1983), Martin (1976), Hays, Roth, Ramsey, and Foulke (1983) and others indicates that the process of writing affords the writer a special opportunity for thinking and thus for learning. Building on the work of Vygotsky (1962), Luria (1971), and Bruner (1971), Emig (1983) argues that both the act and the product of writing are marked by a number of features which, in her words, correspond uniquely to certain powerful learning strategies (p. 123). In the The research reported here was supported by grant number NIE-G-82-0027 from the National Institute of Education. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the policy or position of the funding agency. Research in the Teaching of English, Vol. 20, No. 1, February 1986 69 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.162 on Thu, 30 Jun 2016 05:40:25 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 70 Research in the Teaching of English process of using hand, eye, and brain, the writer may, among other things, sort through ideas, integrate old information with new, and reformulate thoughts. Fostering such processes is especially important since they have been identified as critical intellectual components of more complex forms of

Many researchers in composition instruction assume that free and journal writing exclusively and necessarily produce “meaningful” writing. This is not substantiated in their limited case study research, or in the research of anyone else. We need to establish a precise definition of “meaningful” writing, determine its place in the curriculum, and determine better means of designing instruction that produces writing that is both meaningful and of high quality. The meta-analysis of Hillocks (1984) indicates that structured composition assignments produce better writing than nondirectional writing experiences. This article explores the reasons for this, and establishes hypotheses based on these reasons for developing a theory of composition instruction. The hypotheses support a need for structured instruction, rather than student-generated direction.

A critical area in the advancement of literacy is the production of textbooks that reflect recent insights on language and discourse. However, this project is problematic within the established procedures whereby textbooks are reviewed and approved. This article presents an ethnography of one author's experience and suggests some guidelines whereby rational criteria might be widely established.