View from the margins - 2

‘Let’s encourage discovery first and technique will follow naturally,’ says Tom. If this were true, we would have little need of Rhetoric and Composition classes!

This is not to rule out expressivism, however. ‘Voice’ is important for motivating and developing confidence in a writer, and, indeed, may be particularly useful for marginalised students who may feel their voice is restricted by cultural differences in the writing classroom. The danger here is that separating writing from context may result in solipsism, in which the personal writing produced may not be appropriate for the purpose (UTA Hypernews, 1996).

Engaging with this particular student may require a teacher to draw on several pedagogies. Expressivist methods would suit her in that a basic writer is often already aware that she is a weak writer (Butler, 1987), and needs to develop the confidence not to be ‘scared off’ by errors and academic expectations. Hierarchical teaching, meanwhile, may be useful at Level One to help the transition from school to university. Writing for separate discourse communities, for example, is a skill that incoming students often need help with and this may be achieved by passing on expert knowledge via a teacher or peer tutor. Kells and Balester (1999), for example, suggest combining the needs of a student to learn academic discourse by drawing on their personal experience.

In some ways, this stance represents the two primary discourses in the field of basic writing: critical discourse, such as expressivism and other theory-based approaches, versus the iconic discourse of the heroic teacher-figure that is ‘the troubling legacy of Mina Shaughnessy’ (Gunner, 1998, p.25). I contend that we must adapt to the individual’s needs rather than employing a pedagogy which constrains either the subject’s ‘voice’, via iconic approaches, or the context, via critical discourse. In fact, Lu (1987) argues that teachers should actively avoid employing only one kind of discourse.

This translates into practical options, which offer teacher-led, peer-based and direct empowerment of the writer. For example:

- hybrid approaches, such as we have seen at Wolverhampton with mixed form assignments blending academic essays with non-academic blogs;

- letters, which are less formal but encourage personal engagement and non-error-based re-writing, are directed to an audience, serve as useful teacher-student dialogue and feedback, and also offer a means of acculturation for non-traditional students (Sweeney, 2005);

- performance, where in-class speaking and reading is used to build up familiarity with standard forms through peer group work (Labov, 1970);

- peer editing, which may be less damaging to self-esteem and offer a more supportive atmosphere for learning;

- one-to-one conferences, which offer a personal connection, a safe learning environment for the student, and the opportunity to address individual needs. All of my tutorial students have been too embarrassed to ask their teacher for clarification of assignment criteria, for example.

To reiterate, marginal students need help for a multitude of reasons: an ESL student may have found his voice but is struggling with the language and needs sentence-level tutoring (Blau and Hall, 2002), whereas a female Asian student (as in my mock tutorial) might be excellent academically but lacks confidence and needs help in finding her own voice.

My point is that the writing teacher needs a full toolbox of pedagogies to choose from - not just one.


References

Blau, Susan, and Hall, John. (2002) Guilt-free Tutoring: Rethinking How We Tutor Non-Native-English-Speaking Students. The Writing Center Journal 23(1), pp.23-44.

Butler, J. (1987) Remedial Writers: The Teacher’s Job as Corrector of Papers. in Enos, Theresa (ed.) A Sourcebook for Basic Writing Teachers. New York: Random House, 1987. 557–64.

Gunner, Jeanne. (1998) Iconic Discourse: The Troubling Legacy of Mina Shaughnessy. Journal of Basic Writing 17(2), pp.25-42.

Horner, Bruce, and Lu, Min-Zhan. (1999) Representing the "Other": Basic Writers and the Teaching of Basic Writing. Urbana (Illinois): National Council of Teachers of English.

Kells, Michelle Hall, and Balester, Valerie. (eds.) (1999) Attending to the Margins: Writing, Researching, and Teaching on the Front Lines. Portsmouth (New Hampshire): Heinemann-Boynton/Cook.

Labov, William. (1970) The Study of Non-Standard English. Urbana (Illinois): National Council of Teachers of English.

Lu, Min-Zhan (1987). From Silence to Words: Writing as Struggle. CE (College English) 49(April 1987), pp.437–48.

Sweeney, Linda. (1995) Strategies for Working with Developmental Students: Put it in a Letter. Learning Center Newsletter [online]. Florida: Engineerica Systems, Inc. >http://www.learningassistance.com/2005/december/<

UTA Hypernews (1996) [online] Brooke, Collin. Arlington: University of Texas, 7th September 1996 [cited 16th May 2006]. Expressive Processes: Expressive Pedagogies discussion subject. Available from the Internet: >http://www.uta.edu/HyperNews/get/delgua/2/1/3.html<