[Teaching_Composition] Academic Discourse

Wed, 22 Nov 2006 10:37:27 -0500

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C70E4C.2147B351
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think I would have to read They Say, I Say closer, as well, to see if,
as you say, John, you're reading too much into it, or coming from
another perspective, I'm reading too much into it.  In other words, are
you broadening its terms excessively or is it me being egregiously
reductive?  But whichever is the case, thank you for this fascinating
post!   I enjoyed it immensely.

=20

Bill

=20

________________________________

From: teaching_composition-admin@mailman.eppg.com
[mailto:teaching_composition-admin@mailman.eppg.com] On Behalf Of John
Walter
Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 9:41 AM
To: teaching_composition@mailman.eppg.com
Subject: Re: [Teaching_Composition] Academic Discourse

=20

On 11/21/06, Thelin,William <wthelin@uakron.edu> wrote:

	The way I have worded this in our outcomes statement here at
Akron is that we are teaching rhetorical principles or concepts that
students then can take with them to future writing tasks, whether in
college or elsewhere.  Following the WPA Outcomes Statement, I also
included an outcome of "versatility," which seems to parallel what Linda
is saying about promoting "flexibility" in writers.  I'm glad to see
this strand appear.  One of the problems I have with Graff and
Birkenstein's very popular They Say, I Say is that what we call
"academic writing" (something I don't think really exists in any pure
form) is privileged at the expense of rhetorical situations dependent on
an understanding of audience and purpose.  We're replacing writing with
formulas based on a type of discourse, as Russ suggests, that doesn't
translate well in real-world situations.

Hearing the buzz about They Say, I Say, I requested a copy and my
initial reaction to the book was much the same as Bill's, but on further
reflection I'm seriously considering using it next term. I agree with
much of what has been said about the over emphasis on academic discourse
in FYC, but at the same time I'm required to focus on academic discourse
in the course I'll be teaching next semester. In that course, I will
include assignments that work towards developing flexibility, what we
might call a rhetorical consciousness, but the final outcomes assessment
tool used to analyze final portfolios focuses on academic discourse.=20

Which is why I find myself taking a serious look at Graff and
Birkenstein's They Say, I Say. After my initial reaction to the book, I
reread some of Walter Ong's discussions of the role of rhapsody in
rhetoric--in particular, his reviews of Brian Vicker's Classical
Rhetoric in English Poetry and Samuel Howell's Eighteenth-Century
British Logic and Rhetoric, and his article "Typographic Rhapsody:
Ravisius Textor, Zwinger, and Shakespeare" --for my dissertation chapter
on database technologies as compositional tools. The purpose of copia
and of the commonplace tradition and, quite frankly, the classical and
medieval ars memoria, was not to memorize vast amounts of material but
to have an internalized database of material to use inventively. (Mary
Carruthers' The Craft of Thought , while focusing on medieval monastic
practice, offers one of, if not the, most detailed discussions of this
practice.)

So, with the theory and practice of memoria constantly in the background
of my thinking, and with both Ong's discussions of rhapsodizing and
Carruthers' discussions of memoria foregrounded in my mind, I reread
Graff and Birkenstein's Preface. In the section, "Okay, But Templates?",
they write:=20

The aim of the templates, then, is not to stifle critical thinking but
to be direct with students about the key rhetorical moves that comprise
it. [...] Our templates do, however, provide concrete prompts that can
stimulate and shape such thought: What do "they say" about my topic?
What would a naysayer say about my argument? What is my evidence? Do I
need to qualify my point? Who cares?=20

In fact, templates have a long and rich history. Public orators from
ancient Greece and Rome through the European Renaissance studied
rhetorical topoi or "commonplaces," model passages and formulas that
represented the different strategies available to public speakers. In
many respects, our templates echo this classical rhetorical tradition of
imitating established models. (XV)=20

As I understand them, and this understanding comes from more than just
the passage I quote above, the idea behind They Say, I Say is to use the
templates to interiorize the process of writing as response to an
ongoing discussion, and the purpose of the templates is not for them to
be used verbatim in rote recitation (iterata scentia), but to be used as
a starting point from which to create one's response. In short, the
purpose of the templates is to provide a framework for rhapsodizing.=20

That framework, of course, is the beginning, not the end, of the
process, and from my skimming here and there through the book, Graff and
Birkenstein seem to be aware of this (it could just be that I'm bringing
too much of my own understanding of the commonplace tradition into my
reading of their work). As one interiorizes this framework and the
rhetorical consciousness it requires (issues such as but not limited to
"What do 'they say' about my topic? What would a naysayer say about my
argument? What is my evidence? Do I need to qualify my point? Who cares?
"), one can use it inventively to analyze and meet the needs of
particular rhetorical contexts. This assumption on my part seems to be
bolstered by examples in the book which follow the formulas implicitly
rather than explicitly, once again suggesting to me that the goal is not
to use them by rote but to interiorize them and the noetic processes
needed for their use so that the rhetor can concern herself or himself
with the current rhetorical situation.

Foregrounding this use of the templates, from what I've seen in my
skimming of the book, is largely left up to the instructor. G and B seem
to introduce the idea, at least to this particular reader who is deeply
enmeshed in a dissertation on the theory and practice of memory, but G
and B don't try to dictate how this should be introduced in any
programmatic way. And this is one of the facets I do like about the
book: it seeks not to shape a course as so many FYC textbooks do but,
rather, to be integrated into a course. Unlike many course-in-a-book
texts, They Say, I Say requires an instructor to approach the text
rhetorically, to approach the course as a conversation into which the
text is invited. I might be pushing this metaphor a bit too far, but I
do think this flexibility of the text is one of its strengths.=20

The text does privilege a particular type of discourse, but it's also
short enough to integrate as a unit in a much broader course. But the
more I think about it, the more I'm inclined to think that the book is
more versatile that many of us (including myself) might give it credit
for on first, second, or even third glance. G and B assert that the
"they say, I say" formula governs much more than just academic writing
and do offer a number of examples illustrating this claim. Wanting to
come up with an example of a genre I've taught, I quickly thought of the
resume. If we assume that the "they say, I say" formula is intended to
be used verbatim, to be memorized and repeated as acts of iterata
scentia, then it serves little purpose for resume writing.=20

But if we assume that the goal in using the templates is an act of
reminiscentia , what Albertus Magnus describes as recollection involving
the power of discernment to consciously use that recollection, and what
Aquinas defines as a "quasi-syllogistic" use of recollection according
to one's intentions, then we do find the "they say, I say" formula
applying to resume writing: They (the people doing the hiring) say they
are looking for these specific requirements, and I say (in the form of
my resume and cover letter) that I meet those requirements and am a good
fit for the position. In fact, thought of this way, the "they say, I
say" formula asks the applicant to not be formulaic in the writing of
their resume but to tailor the resume for each specific position.=20

I know it's counter-intuitive for us to think of formulas as being
rhetorical, but they can be, and for much of the history and practice of
rhetoric, they have been. That, rather than the (rote) memorization of
speeches for oral delivery, was the purpose of memoria and the memory
arts. This requires us to approach They Say, I Say as a memory text, as
a handbook for thinking (which is what the ars memoria were for) rather
than as a substitute for thinking (which is what Ramus' method turned
memory into).=20

Again, I could be reading too much into the book, especially since I
haven't yet read it closely. Whether or not I am reading too much into
the book, there is something to think about here: we need to make the
distinction between formulas ( copia, tropes, commonplaces, topoi, ars
memoria, etc.) for rhapsodizing and formulas as Ramist method. Because
method came to dominate the teaching of rhetoric and writing, we've
forgotten the former, even going so far as to project our understanding
back onto classical rhetoric ( e.g., Corbett's still widely accepted
claim that the purpose of memoria was memorizing speechs for oral
delivery).

John=20

--=20
John Walter | walterj@slu.edu
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English
Walter J. Ong Collection Processing Archivist, Pius XII Memorial Library
Saint Louis University=20

------_=_NextPart_001_01C70E4C.2147B351
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:st1=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]--><o:SmartTagType
 namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
name=3D"country-region"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"place"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"City"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"PlaceType"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"PlaceName"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"PersonName"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
 /* Font Definitions */
 @font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
 /* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
p
	{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
	margin-right:0in;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
	margin-left:0in;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle20
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:Arial;
	color:navy;}
@page Section1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
	{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>

</head>

<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dblue>

<div class=3DSection1>

I think I would have to read =
They Say,
I Say closer, as well, to see if, as you say, John, you&#8217;re =
reading
too much into it, or coming from another perspective, I&#8217;m reading =
too
much into it.&nbsp; In other words, are you broadening its terms =
excessively or is
it me being egregiously reductive?&nbsp; But whichever is the case, =
thank you for
this fascinating post! &nbsp;&nbsp;I enjoyed it =
immensely.<o:p></o:p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Bill<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<div class=3DMsoNormal align=3Dcenter style=3D'text-align:center'><font =
size=3D3
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>

<hr size=3D2 width=3D"100%" align=3Dcenter tabindex=3D-1>

</span></font></div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><b><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font =
size=3D2
face=3DTahoma><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
teaching_composition-admin@mailman.eppg.com
[mailto:teaching_composition-admin@mailman.eppg.com] <b><span =
style=3D'font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>John Walter<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Wednesday, November =
22, 2006
9:41 AM<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> <st1:PersonName =
w:st=3D"on">teaching_composition@mailman.eppg.com</st1:PersonName><br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re:
[Teaching_Composition] Academic Discourse</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
On 11/21/06, <b><span =
style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Thelin,William</span></b> &lt;<a
href=3D"mailto:wthelin@uakron.edu">wthelin@uakron.edu</a>&gt; =
wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<blockquote style=3D'border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC =
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;
margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in'>

<div link=3Dblue vlink=3Dblue>

<div>

<p><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
Arial;color:navy'>The way I have worded this in our outcomes statement =
here at
Akron is that we are teaching rhetorical principles or concepts that =
students
then can take with them to future writing tasks, whether in college or
elsewhere.&nbsp; Following the WPA Outcomes Statement, I also included =
an
outcome of &quot;versatility,&quot; which seems to parallel what Linda =
is
saying about promoting &quot;flexibility&quot; in writers.&nbsp; I'm =
glad to
see this strand appear.&nbsp; One of the problems I have with Graff and
Birkenstein's very popular <u>They Say, I Say</u> is that what we call
&quot;academic writing&quot; (something I don't think really exists in =
any pure
form) is privileged at the expense of rhetorical situations dependent on =
an
understanding of audience and purpose.&nbsp; We're replacing writing =
with
formulas based on a type of discourse, as Russ suggests, that doesn't =
translate
well in real-world situations.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

</div>

</blockquote>

<div>

Hearing the buzz about They =
Say, I
Say, I requested a copy and my initial reaction to the book =
was much
the same as Bill's, but on further reflection I'm seriously considering =
using
it next term. I agree with much of what has been said about the over =
emphasis
on academic discourse in FYC, but at the same time I'm required to focus =
on
academic discourse in the course I'll be teaching next semester. In that
course, I will include assignments that work towards developing =
flexibility,
what we might call a rhetorical consciousness, but the final outcomes
assessment tool used to analyze final portfolios focuses on academic =
discourse.
<o:p></o:p>

<div>

Which is why I find myself taking a serious look at Graff and =
Birkenstein's They Say, I Say. After my initial =
reaction
to the book, I reread some of Walter Ong's discussions of the role of =
rhapsody
in rhetoric--in particular, his reviews of Brian Vicker's Classical Rhetoric in English =
Poetry and
Samuel Howell's Eighteenth-Century =
British
Logic and Rhetoric, and his article &quot;Typographic =
Rhapsody:
Ravisius Textor, Zwinger, and Shakespeare&quot; --for my dissertation =
chapter
on database technologies as compositional tools. The purpose of copia and of the commonplace =
tradition
and, quite frankly, the classical and medieval ars
memoria, was not to memorize vast amounts of material but to =
have an
internalized database of material to use inventively. (Mary Carruthers' =
The Craft of Thought , while =
focusing on
medieval monastic practice, offers one of, if not the, most detailed
discussions of this practice.) 
 
So, with the theory and practice of memoria
constantly in the background of my thinking, and with both Ong's =
discussions of
rhapsodizing and Carruthers' discussions of memoria
foregrounded in my mind, I reread Graff and Birkenstein's Preface. In =
the
section, &quot;Okay, But Templates?&quot;, they write: =
<o:p></o:p>

<div style=3D'margin-left:30.0pt'>

The aim of the templates, then, is not to stifle critical =
thinking but
to be direct with students about the key rhetorical moves that comprise =
it.
[...] Our templates do, however, provide concrete prompts that can =
stimulate and
shape such thought: What do &quot;they say&quot; about my topic? What =
would a
naysayer say about my argument? What is my evidence? Do I need to =
qualify my
point? Who cares? 
 
In fact, templates have a long and rich history. Public orators from =
ancient <st1:country-region
w:st=3D"on">Greece</st1:country-region> and <st1:City =
w:st=3D"on"><st1:place w:st=3D"on">Rome</st1:place></st1:City>
through the European Renaissance studied rhetorical topoi or &quot;commonplaces,&quot; model passages and
formulas that represented the different strategies available to public
speakers. In many respects, our templates echo this classical rhetorical
tradition of imitating established models. (XV) =
<o:p></o:p>

</div>

As I understand them, and this understanding comes from more than just =
the
passage I quote above, the idea behind They
Say, I Say is to use the templates to interiorize the process =
of
writing as response to an ongoing discussion, and the purpose of the =
templates
is not for them to be used verbatim in rote recitation (iterata scentia), but to be used =
as a
starting point from which to create one's response. In short, the =
purpose of
the templates is to provide a framework for rhapsodizing. 
 
That framework, of course, is the beginning, not the end, of the =
process, and
from my skimming here and there through the book, Graff and Birkenstein =
seem to
be aware of this (it could just be that I'm bringing too much of my own =
understanding
of the commonplace tradition into my reading of their work). As one
interiorizes this framework and the rhetorical consciousness it requires
(issues such as but not limited to &quot;What do 'they say' about my =
topic?
What would a naysayer say about my argument? What is my evidence? Do I =
need to
qualify my point? Who cares? &quot;), one can use it inventively to =
analyze and
meet the needs of particular rhetorical contexts. This assumption on my =
part
seems to be bolstered by examples in the book which follow the formulas
implicitly rather than explicitly, once again suggesting to me that the =
goal is
not to use them by rote but to interiorize them and the noetic processes =
needed
for their use so that the rhetor can concern herself or himself with the
current rhetorical situation. 
 
Foregrounding this use of the templates, from what I've seen in my =
skimming of
the book, is largely left up to the instructor. G and B seem to =
introduce the
idea, at least to this particular reader who is deeply enmeshed in a =
dissertation
on the theory and practice of memory, but G and B don't try to dictate =
how this
should be introduced in any programmatic way. And this is one of the =
facets I
do like about the book: it seeks not to shape a course as so many FYC =
textbooks
do but, rather, to be integrated into a course. Unlike many =
course-in-a-book
texts, They Say, I Say =
requires
an instructor to approach the text rhetorically, to approach the course =
as a
conversation into which the text is invited. I might be pushing this =
metaphor a
bit too far, but I do think this flexibility of the text is one of its
strengths. 
 
The text does privilege a particular type of discourse, but it's also =
short
enough to integrate as a unit in a much broader course. But the more I =
think
about it, the more I'm inclined to think that the book is more versatile =
that
many of us (including myself) might give it credit for on first, second, =
or
even third glance. G and B assert that the &quot;they say, I say&quot; =
formula
governs much more than just academic writing and do offer a number of =
examples
illustrating this claim. Wanting to come up with an example of a genre =
I've
taught, I quickly thought of the resume. If we assume that the =
&quot;they say,
I say&quot; formula is intended to be used verbatim, to be memorized and =
repeated
as acts of iterata =
scentia, then
it serves little purpose for resume writing. 
 
But if we assume that the goal in using the templates is an act of =
reminiscentia , what Albertus =
Magnus
describes as recollection involving the power of discernment to =
consciously use
that recollection, and what Aquinas defines as a =
&quot;quasi-syllogistic&quot;
use of recollection according to one's intentions, then we do find the
&quot;they say, I say&quot; formula applying to resume writing: They =
(the
people doing the hiring) say they are looking for these specific =
requirements,
and I say (in the form of my resume and cover letter) that I meet those
requirements and am a good fit for the position. In fact, thought of =
this way,
the &quot;they say, I say&quot; formula asks the applicant to not be =
formulaic
in the writing of their resume but to tailor the resume for each =
specific
position. <o:p></o:p>

</div>

I know it's counter-intuitive for us to think of formulas as being =
rhetorical,
but they can be, and for much of the history and practice of rhetoric, =
they
have been. That, rather than the (rote) memorization of speeches for =
oral
delivery, was the purpose of memoria
and the memory arts. This requires us to approach They Say, I Say as a memory text, as a handbook for =
thinking
(which is what the ars =
memoria
were for) rather than as a substitute for thinking (which is what Ramus' =
method
turned memory into). 
 
Again, I could be reading too much into the book, especially since I =
haven't
yet read it closely. Whether or not I am reading too much into the book, =
there
is something to think about here: we need to make the distinction =
between
formulas ( copia, =
tropes,
commonplaces, topoi, =
ars memoria, etc.) for =
rhapsodizing and
formulas as Ramist method. Because method came to dominate the teaching =
of
rhetoric and writing, we've forgotten the former, even going so far as =
to
project our understanding back onto classical rhetoric ( e.g., Corbett's =
still
widely accepted claim that the purpose of memoria
was memorizing speechs for oral delivery). 
 
John <o:p></o:p>

</div>

</div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><br>
-- <br>
John Walter | <a href=3D"mailto:walterj@slu.edu">walterj@slu.edu</a><br>
Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English<br>
Walter J. Ong Collection Processing Archivist, Pius XII Memorial =
Library<br>
<st1:place w:st=3D"on"><st1:PlaceName w:st=3D"on">Saint =
Louis</st1:PlaceName> <st1:PlaceType
 w:st=3D"on">University</st1:PlaceType></st1:place> =
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C70E4C.2147B351--