Identifying Natural Sources of Resistance: A Case Study of Implementing Writing Across the Curriculum
Abstract
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
- Journal
- Research in the Teaching of English
- Published
- 1986-02-01
- DOI
- 10.58680/rte198615623
- Open Access
- Closed
- Topics
Citation Context
Cited by in this index (1)
-
Palmquist et al. (1995)Computers and Composition
Cites in this index (0)
No references match articles in this index.
Related Articles
-
Composition Forum Oct 2025
-
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Oct 2025One Size Does Not Fit All: How Clinical Pain Assessment Scales and Tools Mask Crip Narratives of Chronicity ↗Adrianna Deptula
-
Research in the Teaching of English Aug 2024An Eight-Year Longitudinal Study of an English Language Arts Teacher’s Developmental Path through Multiple Contexts ↗Peter Smagorinsky; Stacia L. Long
-
Rhetoric & Public Affairs Jun 2023Kyle King
-
Pedagogy Apr 2023Timothy Ponce