Response to February 6th readings.

I think that Geisler text provides a really good summary of research done on academic writing. While reading this text, I was thinking “how do I relate this to those authors who were talking about happenings and writing as a creative act more than as an intellectual or academic activity?”. And sincerely, even though I would love to try out the happenings, I do recognize that if I put myself in the first-year comp teacher’s shoes that would be really hard. Why? Because I do know that writing in academic settings is different than writing in other kind of social contexts. Because I think that academic writing it is highly framed by institutional and disciplinary “boundaries”. Boundaries that despite of being fuzzy, are boundaries. I do think that writing, as any other social action, highly depends on context. The problem, I guess, for comp teachers, is to decide how to define context. And if to the previous we add the fact that in many first year comp courses we have 1) students who do not know what major they will pursue (so what disciplinary field are we dealing with?), 2) students whose first language is not English (how do we teach them?), 3) students who think that writing is not important in their disciplines (or in their lives!), 4) institutional demands, 5) department demands, and so on. In summary, we have to deal with a great amount of heterogeneity not only in regards to student body, disciplinary fields, institutional frames, and type of contents taught in the class. Let’s add to this the fact that in current times, we do not only have to teach how to write one word after the other, but also include new modes of representation that affect the composing process (Are you overwhelmed yet?, I am!). And it is at this point when I read Geisler’s third alternative and it makes me feel good: we should “reinvent general education” and “remake the writing practices of the U.S. academy into something other than a tool for the creation and recreation of the Great Divide between expert and layperson” (p. 118). What I would love to know, though, is how to bring to life these beautiful words in my own teaching practice. I am still trying to find the way, reason why I took this course. I think that the mere fact that we are discussing these issues is a step further in being better teachers. Answers? Not even one. Questions? Many.