Myers and Haefner

Since the inception of the composition class, there has been debate on how to teach writing, and what should be included. Sometimes when I read these articles by the major players in the field (Elbow, Lunsford, Burke, etc.) I feel like I am the little kid that doesn't quite understand the argument, and even if I did try to speak up, they would probably tell me to stay out of it. Either way, I read and I have our humble blog to state my opinions and reactions to the readings.

Haefner: To keep it simple, I will cite pg 133 because it gets to the point of his argument. "I want to suggest three ways in which the personal essay can be integrated into a collaborative writing pedagogy. First, by asking students to reconstruct the cultural context in which personal essays are written. Second, by urging students to test the ethos of the rhetorical situation...Third, by asking students to examine for themselves the place of the personal essay in the university curriculum." I think these are all great suggestions to "begin a dialogue that will lead to more possibilities." This argument was inspired by an assertion that essays are accessible by all. Haefner disagrees with this notion, based on education level and socio-economic background. I agree that the essay is accessible to all is a wonderful ideal, but it is not the case. How "democratic" is the essay? I'm not really sure what Haefner is suggesting by stating the essay is 'collaborative' because that word has many connotations, especially in the teaching world. It seemed like jargon that was thrown out there (Collaborative pedagogy) but was not thoroughly explained enough.

Myers: I like that he discusses Marxism, and how "reality is always a social construction", even using Huck Finn as an example of what he means. He thoroughly set up his argument before making his point. He is trying to debunk Leonard's argument that student's must write for "the real world". But what is the real world if it is a construction? If we ask a student to write an essay about their neighborhood, and then "cut out any statements unsupported by facts" then we aren't "really learning what a place is like." The end for the professor is a more "readable" paper. However it is not reality. It is a reality through the editor's lens.

What I also find useful and interesting in this article is Bruffee's metaphor of writing as "a 'thing' someone has made, like a table or chair--something artificially designed, shaped, and put together to serve a purpose." I like that Myers thought to include this because in essence, this is what an essay is. Essays serve a purpose. Myers is also not a fan of Elbows, as he picks apart his reformist efforts by pointing out that authority is not just present in school, but in culture as well, something Elbow does not apparently take into consideration. Meyers concludes his argument by stating a request "for more skepticism about what assignments do to reproduce the structures of our society" (170).