Faigley's article made a poignant argument about the importance of teacher response in the development of writing students. He illuminates the historical evolution of writing pedagogy, and in doing so emphasizes the importance of discerning feedback for students. Lester Faigley argues that teacher response is important for teaching student's the historical context and contemporary relationship between discourse, culture definitions of self, and power. Faigley believes that critical response to student writing can demonstrate the connection between discursive constructions of self and privilege. I was particularly intrigued by Faigley's final paragraph. He calls to question the "student selves" promoted in What Makes Writing Good. He questions the subject-driven value of writing about past experience, and it's propensity to critique our past selves in place of discussing contemporary contradictions. This call for self-awareness touches upon the conflict between our "true self" and cultural values. To understand discourse and writing as a means of manipulating and empowering our true self within a societal context I believe is the heart of this essay.
The Harris article discusses a different view of writing response. Muriel Harris argues that evaluation should be taught as its own process, one which coincides with the writing process and teaches students about the complex relationship between writer and audience. She explains the cyclical relationship of writing and evaluation, and the ability for each to improve the other. The critical response to another's writing gives insight into one's own writing. Harris believes that a staged process of evaluation in conjunction with the stages of writing develops the critical skills necessary to improve as a writer.
No comments:
Post a Comment