College Composition and Communication, Vol. 39, No. 2, May 1988

Click here to view the individual articles in this issue at http://www.ncte.org/cccc/ccc/issues/v39-2

George, Diana. Rev. of The Prose Reader: Essays for College Writers by Kim Flachmann and Michael Flachmann; Ways of Reading: An Anthology for Writers by David Bartholomae and Anthony Petrosky; Reading Critically, Writing Well by Rise B. Axelrod and Charles R. Cooper; Reading Texts: Reading, Responding, Writing by Kathleen McCormick, Gary Waller, and Linda Flower. CCC 39.2 (1988): 239-243.

Hesse, Douglas. Rev. of Style as Argument: Contemporary American Nonfiction by Chris Anderson. CCC 39.2 (1988): 243-245.

Crowley, Sharon. Rev. of Rhetoric and Reality: Writing Instruction in American Colleges, 1900-1985 by James A. Berlin. CCC 39.2 (1988): 245-247.

Durst, Russel K. Rev. of Writing in Real Time: Modelling Production Processes by Ann Matsuhashi. CCC 39.2 (1988): 247-249.

Raimes, Ann. Rev. of Teaching Writing as a Second Language by Alice S. Horning. CCC 39.2 (1988): 249-250.

Davis, Kevin. “Response to Kathleen E. Welch, ‘Ideology and Freshman Textbook Production.'” CCC 39.2 (1988): 236-237.

Welch, Kathleen E. “Reply by Kathleen E. Welch.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 237-238.

Grow, Gerald. “Lessons from the Computer Writing Problems of Professionals.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 217-220.

Brenner, Gerry. “Does Your Curriculum Need Editing?” CCC 39.2 (1988): 220-223.

Viera, Carroll. “The Grammarian as Basic Writer: An Exercise for Teachers CCC 39.2 (1988): 224-227.

Lott, Bret. “Remedial Writers and Fictive Techniques CCC 39.2 (1988): 227-230.

White, John O. “Who Writes These Questions, Anyway? CCC 39.2 (1988): 230-235.

Anson, Chris M. and Hildy Miller. “Journals in Composition: An Update.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 198-216.

Abstract:

This article, written originally to update the inventory of composition and rhetoric journals, including current editors and publishing locations, encourages the growth of interdisciplinary connections between composition and other related fields by including contact, subscription, and publishing information for more than two dozen journals outside the field of composition.

Keywords:

ccc39.2 English Teachers University Journals Composition Articles Research Teaching Rhetoric

No works cited.

Arrington, Phillip. “A Dramatistic Approach to Understanding and Teaching the Paraphrase.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 185-197.

Abstract:

This article argues that paraphrasing is an important rhetorical activity; students who paraphrase well know how to interpret an original text and revise it to fit into a new rhetorical situation. The author suggests that instructors use Burke’s dramatistic framework to teach paraphrase, as the pentad terms help students analyze the original text and identify features to stress, reduce, and amplify in their paraphrase. Paraphrasing links reading and writing, and as the author argues, should be one of the central, recurring focuses of the college composition classroom. The article gives several examples and exercises that teachers can use to incorporate paraphrasing in their courses, including asking students to both compose their own paraphrases and to rhetorically analyze others’ paraphrases.

Keywords:

ccc39.2 Students Paraphrase ANWhitehead KMarx KBurke Texts Ideas Science Writing Religion Context Sources Agent Reading Dramatism Interpretation

Works Cited

Altieri, Charles. Act and Quality: A Theory of Literary Meaning and Humanistic Understanding. Amherst: U of Mass P, 1981.

Anderson, T.H. “Study Strategies and Adjunct Aids.” Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension. Ed. R.J. Spiro, B.C. Bruce, and W.F. Brewer. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980. 483-502.

Bazerman, Charles. “What Written Knowledge Does: Three Examples of Academic Discourse.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11 (September 1981): 361-87.

Brown, A.L., J. D. Day, and R. S. Jones. “The Development of Plans for Summarizing Texts.” Child Development 54 (August 1983): 968-79.

Burke, Kenneth. A Grammar of Motives. 1945. Berkeley: U of California P, 1969.

D’Angelo, Frank. “The Art of the Paraphrase.” CCC 30 (October 1979): 255-59.

Erasmus, Desiderius. On Copia of Words and Things. Trans. Donald B. King et al. Milwaukee, WI: Marquette UP, 1963.

Flower, Linda, and John R. Hayes. “The Dynamics of Composing: Making Plans and Juggling Constraints.” Cognitive Processes in Writing. Ed. L.W. Gregg and E.R. Steinberg. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980. 3-30.

Gilbert, G.N. “Referencing as Persuasion.” Social Studies of Science 7 (February 1977): 113-22.

Kennedy, Mary Lynch. “The Composing Process of College Students Writing from Sources.” Written Communication 2 (October 1985): 434-56.

Murphy, James J. “Rhetorical History as a Guide to the Salvation of American Reading and Writing: A Plea for Curricular Courage.” The Rhetorical Tradition and Modern Writing. Ed. James J. Murphy. New York: MLA, 1982. 3-12.

Quintilian. Lnstitutio Oratoria. Trans. H.E. Butler. 4 vols. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1920.

Rarteray, Oswald M.T. “Expanding Roles for Summarized Information.” Written Communication 2 (October 1985): 457-72.

Sherrard, Carol. “Summary Writing: A Topographical Study.” Written Communication 3 (July 1986): 324-43.

Volosinov, V.N. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Trans. Ladislav Matejka and I.R. Titunik. New York: Seminar, 1973.

Whitehead, Alfred North. Science and the Modern World. New York: Free Press, 1925.

Haas, Christina, and Linda Flower. “Rhetorical Reading Strategies and the Construction of Meaning.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 167-183.

Abstract:

This article uses a study of readers trying to understand a complex college-level text through a think-aloud procedure to show how reading is both constructive and rhetorical. The study participants used the text along with their own personal perspective of the world, the issue, and the specific text discourse conventions to understand the meaning of the text. They noted that more experienced readers drew more on the wider rhetorical situation (the author’s purpose, context, and audience) to deconstruct the text, while freshman readers primarily focused on the specific content of the text. The authors argue that a constructive, rhetorical view of reading can transform pedagogical practices from teaching texts to teaching readers, with the teacher acting as a model co-reader to elicit varying responses to and interpretations of a piece instead of one correct answer.

Keywords:

ccc39.2 BraddockAward Readers Texts Reading Strategies Content Students Representation Meaning Information Process Discourse Rhetoric RhetoricalReading Authors

Works Cited

Baker, Linda, and Ann L. Brown. “Metacognitive Skills and Reading.” Handbook of Reading Research. Ed. R. Barr, Michael L. Kamil, and Peter Mosenthal. New York: Longman, 1984. 353-94.

Bereiter, Carl, and Marlene Scardamalia. “Cognitive Coping Strategies and the Problem of Inert Knowledge.” Learning and Thinking Skills: Research and Open Questions. Ed. Susan Chipman, J. Segal, and Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1985. 65-80.

Bransford, John. Cognition: Learning, Understanding and Remembering. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1979.

Farnham-Diggory, Sylvia. Cognitive Processes in Education: A Psychological Preparation for Teaching and Curriculum Development. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.

Flower, Linda. “The Construction of Purpose in Writing and Reading.” College English, in press.

Flower, Linda. “Interpretive Acts: Cognition and the Construction of Discourse.” Poetics 16 (April 1987): 109-30.

Flower, Linda, and John R. Hayes. “Images, Plans, and Prose: The Representation of Meaning in Writing.” Written Communication 1 (January 1984): 120-60.

Flower, Linda, John R. Hayes, Karen Shriver, Linda Carey, and Christina Haas. Planning in Writing: A Theory of the Cognitive Process. ONR Technical Report # 1. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon, 1987.

Haas, Christina, and John R. Hayes. “What Did I Just Say? Reading Problems in Writing with the Machine.” Research in the Teaching of English 20 (February 1986): 22-35.

Scardamalia, Marlene. “How Children Cope with the Cognitive Demands of Writing,” Writing: The Nature, Development, and Teaching of Written Communication (Vol. 2). Ed. Carl Frederiksen, M. F. Whiteman, and J. F. Dominic. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1981. 81-103.

Spivey, Nancy N. “Construing Constructivism: Reading Research in the United States.” Poetics 16 (April 1987): 169-93.

Tierney, Robert, and P. David Pearson. “Toward a Composing Model of Reading.” Composing and Comprehending. Ed. Julie M. Jensen. Urbana, IL: NCTE, 1984. 33-45.

Vipond, Douglas, and Russell Hunt. “Point-driven Understanding: Pragmatic and Cognitive Dimensions of Literary Reading.” Poetics 13 (June 1984): 261-77.

Sloan, Gary. “Relational Ambiguity between Sentences.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 154-165.

Abstract:

This article argues that the extensive classification of the semantic relationship between sentences does not account for the relational ambiguity that necessarily exists between sentences. This is due to our understanding of meaning-making in discourse, which often leads us to make inferences when explicit transitional markers do not exist. The author, using the results of a class exercise he conducted with students, explores the causes of this ambiguity, which include looking at sentences in isolation as opposed to in a greater discourse framework, responding to a text in a more direct and unambiguous way than the author intends, and the reading in of external associations that vary from reader to reader. Regional ambiguity occurs because reading is anticipatory – the reader creates expectations of purpose and then only reads to confirm and impose that specific outlook. Because so much of the understanding of a text relies on this regional ambiguity, the author argues, most explicit transitional markers in sentences are unnecessary. The author concludes by stating that regional ambiguity necessitates a more complex understanding of meaning-making than elementary classifications of types of sentence coherence provide.

Keywords:

ccc39.2 Anxiety Semantics Sentence Ambiguity Text Relationships Paragraph Markers Meaning Students Critics Writers

Works Cited

Chase, Stuart. “Words and the World View.” College English: The First Year. Ed. Alton C. Morris et al. 7th ed. New York: Harcourt, 1978. 153-57.

de Beaugrande, Robert. Text, Discourse, and Process. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1980.

Evans, Bergen. “Grammar for Today.” College English: The First Year. Ed. Alton C. Morris et al. 7th ed. New York: Harcourt, 1978. 158-62.

Fahnestock, Jeanne. “Semantic and Lexical Coherence.” CCC 34 (1983): 400-16.

Gorrell, Robert. “Not by Nature: Approaches to Rhetoric.” English Journal 55 (1966): 409-16.

Gutwinski, Waldemar. Cohesion in Literary Texts. The Hague: Mouton, 1976.

Grice, H. Paul. “Logic and Conversation.” Speech Acts. Ed. Peter Cole and Jerry L. Morgan. Syntax and Semantics 3. New York: Academic, 1975.41-54.

Halliday, M.A.K., and R. Hasan. Cohesion in English. London: Longman, 1976.

Luria, Alexander. Language and Cognition. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1981.

Mead, Margaret. “One Vote for This Age of Anxiety.” Insight: A Rhetoric Reader. Ed. Emil Hurtik. New York: J.B. Lippincott, 1970. 57-60.

Sloan, Gary. “The Frequency of Transitional Markers in Discursive Prose.” College English 46 (1984): 158-75.

Statler, William. “A Sense of Structure.” CCC 29 (1978): 341-45.

van Dijk, Teun. Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1980.

—. “Semantic Macrostructures and Knowledge Frames in Discourse Comprehension.” Cognitive Processes in Comprehension. Ed. M.A. Just and P .A. Carpenter. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1973. 3-32.

—. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman, 1977.

Winterowd, W. Ross. “The Grammar of Coherence.” College English 31 (1970): 828-35.

Schultz, Lucille M., Chester H. Laine, and Mary C. Savage. “Interaction among School and College Writing Teachers: Toward Recognizing and Remaking Old Patterns.” CCC 39.2 (1988): 139-153.

Abstract:

The authors, who note the increasing collaboration between university and secondary school writing teachers, argue that there needs to be more scholarly, analytical and critical attention given to this important emerging relationship. They present a history of the past difficult collaboration between school and college English teachers, and suggest that the problem stems from a culture clash: our society places school teachers and college teachers in separate cultures that have different publication venues and audiences, different incentive systems for collaboration, and different restraints on resources and time. The authors argue that a fruitful collaborative relationship between the two cultures has to happen through mutual praxis, or critical practice that continuously involves judgment and reflection, where both college and school teachers are involved in research, theory-making, and practice.

Keywords:

ccc39.2 Teachers Colleges School Writing English Interaction Projects Collaboration HighSchool Culture

Works Cited

Archer, Jerome w. “Counciletter, The St. Louis Convention: Friday Program.” English Journal 45 (Oct. 1956): 48-49.

Becker, Howard S., and Blanche Geer. “Participant Observation and Interviewing: A Comparison.” Qualitative Methodology. Ed. William J. Filstead. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1970. 133-42.

Benedict, Ruth. Patterns of Culture. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1934.

Berlin, James A. Writing Instruction in Nineteenth-Century American Colleges. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1984.

Bernstein, Basil. Toward a Theory of Educational Transmission. Vol. 3 of Class Codes and Control. 3 vols. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1977.

Bernstein, Richard. Praxis and Action: Contemporary Philosophies of Human Activity. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1983.

Boggs, W. Arthur. “Dear Principal.” English Journal 47 (Feb. 1958): 86-87.

Boyer, Ernest L. High School. New York: Harper and Row, 1983.

Brownson, Carleton. “The Relations Between Colleges and Secondary Schools: Tendencies and Possibilities.” The School Review 18 (Oct. 1910): 548-59.

Coffman, George R. “Correlation Between High-School and College English.” English Journal 11 (March 1922): 129-39.

Dean, Leonard F. “A Letter to a High-School English Teacher.” English journal 31 (Sept. 1942): 543-48.

Fortune, Ron, ed. School-College Collaborative Programs in English. New York: MLA, 1986.

Jumper, Will C. “Dear Instructor of College Composition.” English Journal 47 (May 1958): 289-91.

Kitzhaber, Albert R. “Reform in English.” College English 26 (Feb. 1965): 337-44.

Maeroff, Gene L. School and College: Partnerships in Education. Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation, 1983.

McQuade, Donald. ”’Who Do You Think You’re Talking To?’: Trading Ideas for Insults in the English Profession.” English Journal 65 (Nov. 1976): 8-10.

Miller, Jean Baker. Toward a New Psychology of Women. 1976. Boston: Beacon, 1986.

“News and Notes: The New York Meeting.” English Journal 1 (Feb. 1912): 124-25.

“News and Notes: The Seattle Committee on the Correlation of High School and University Work.” English Journal 18 (Feb. 1929): 174-75.

Pitman, Mary Anne. “Women and Leadership in American Higher Education: Marginality and Ritual in Organizational Culture.” Unpublished essay, 1987.

Polansky, Stuart B. 900 Shows a Year: A Look at Teaching from a Teacher’s Side of the Desk. New York: Random House, 1986.

Rice, Warner G. “Articulation of the Secondary School and the College.” College English 2 (Nov. 1940): 136-45.

Sams, Henry W. “Counciletter: Report from the College Section.” College English 31 (Dec. 1969): 313-14.

Savage, Mary. “Can Ethnographic Narrative Be a Neighborly Act?” Anthropology and Education Quarterly 19 (March 1988): 3-19.

Smith, Dora V. ”’The English Language Arts’: A Link Between Yesterday and Tomorrow.” English Journal 42 (Jan. 1953): 72-79.

Steinberg, Erwin. “Articulation: A Sermon.” College English 20 (April 1959): 363-65.

Tovatt, Anthony, and Arno Jewett. “This World of English.” English journal 48 (Dec. 1959): 540-41.

Traver, Rob. “Autobiography, Feminism, and the Study of Teaching.” Rev. of The Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. M. C. Wittrock. Teachers College Record 38 (Spring 1987): 443-52.

Watson, Cresap S. “What Do You Teach Them in High School?” English journal 47 (March 1958): 152 +.

Whitehead, Alfred North. Science and the Modern World. New York: Macmillan, 1950.

Willis, Paul. Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Classjobs. New York: Columbia UP, 1977.

Wilson, George P. “What Is Wrong with High-School English?” English Journal 11 (June 1922): 355-60.