Thoughts on Shen's Article

First and foremost, I am going to take up the proposition of speaking in a more colloquial vernacular and syntax because I don't feel much like editing my speech pattern. Now, its at this time that I can speak to the interesting aspects of Shen's article, how i can relate to it and have some part of me shinning through but to be quite honest I just had a tiny little cynical voice questioning the actuality and the literal translation of the individual I had.
My first thoughts were that this conception only truly exists in higher forms of education; beyond basic community and college and beyond the remedial or even basic forms of English composition. I take a moment to agree and acknowledge Shen's point; That various cultural differences WILL effect writing and that a teacher/professor/educator must be aware of the differences in order to properly address and assist the student. I agree. Good point.
BUT to be cynical, how many teachers have I ever seen that truly emphasize individuality. Who truly want to hear what any student has to say. Its nice to have an Ayn Rand style of conception of Western Civilization (except for all the extreme aspects) in which the crux and beauty of our civilization exists upon the need for individuality and the production of an immediate point.
The point of proper voice within a paper; the ability to use an active voice are strong aspects of  standard English composition but something bothers me about the ideal concept that educators were truly pushing for an individual voice. Forgive my squirrely brain but to me, it seems like most of the education that I've seen and been taught has been to be able to produce a well formed composition that SOUNDS LIKE the thoughts, formations and presentation of the masses in a nice individualistic package with its own tiny, exotic details.
(The whole true individuality point has to be tackled. I've had a handful of previous educators on the other side of the fence - attempting to encourage a truly individual voice, form and structure while balancing standard rhetoric, composition and form. Not easy. But I see my friends and colleagues attempting to do the same and someday I hope my tiny voice of cynicism has no basis or validity at all.)
With that in mind, Shen's deconstruction of Western and (in her individual case) Eastern thinking in basic application of composition is concerned strikes as somewhat more useful to me than probably intended.
I can vaguely relate to Shen's initial writing process and structure. I wrote and still write very similarly from time to time. A great difference occurs though - in that my culture is largely a Western one. I grew up in Texas, taught only to speak in English and essentially read and write in a Western mindset. Yet, I acknowledge that I do not speak, write or think in any real form of Standard English and thereby am within a different mind frame and inclination. As such, I'd commend that Shen's article could apply to me or to any number of students in nearly any level of education in which Standard English thinking is a foreign language.
(Does anyone else find it amusing that a group of teachers/future educators are waiting to the last moment to complete an assignment. I believe I have decent reason to be more a bigger procrastinator than usual; 'tis my birthday today and I really wanted to just ignore this sucker until the last possible moment.)-James M.