Chapter 6: Politics and Ideologies

Leading Questions from the chapter:

•What aspects of L2 writing instruction, if any, might be considered political or ideological?

The reading material chosen- are we reading texts of the dominant society or are we integrating a variety of texts from both dominant and minority literature?

The media tools used- are we using media that are generally accessible only to the dominant society and if so, how might these disadvantage L2 writers attempting to produce their own texts through these unfamiliar media?

“All forms of ESL instruction are ideological, whether or not educators are conscious of the political implications of their instructional choices.” (Benesch, 1993)

•To what extent do L2 writing teachers have an obligation to help their students learn to follow existing writing conventions or to question, critique, and change those conventions?

View of Inseparability- We have a duty to make students aware of the ways that English is a power language and obligate them to question, resist, and challenge the status quo

Accomodationalist view- We must teach our L2 students how to use and appropriate English language proficiency as a means of survival in the dominating and subjugating English society. Avoid political agendas in the classroom.

“A prime example of what I consider extreme in critical theory and pedagogy is the premise that everything is political and ideological.” (Santos, 2001)

What will be the role of Internet technology in L2 writing classes in the coming years? In what ways will Internet technology affect the “digital divide”?

We have come to reconceptualize our definition of literacy- our L2 students will need to be made aware and capable of developing this expanded literacy skill set if they are to be competitive with L1 learners

We have come to reconceptualize our understanding of how students learn to be literate. These new components of visual literacy and digital media require new methods of teaching and an awareness of new ways of learning

“No technology is neutral or value free.” (Murray, 2000b)

As teachers, we need to consider the arguments posed in this chapter in relation to our own local contexts and teaching purposes.

Pragmatic orientation vs. Critical orientation

What kind of help do we believe students need? Let’s discuss these arguments

•English language learning cannot be separated from culture and ideology

•It is erroneous to assert that education and human relations are purely political

•Due to historical reasons, L1 composition is more ideological while L2 composition is more pragmatic

•L2 pedagogy is just as politically charged as L1, but it is not as openly discussed

•It is important to ask ourselves not only what we want our students to learn, but why we want them to learn it. “What is gained by asking students to master the social practices of Western academic discourse that support a particular orientation toward knowledge?” (McKay, 1993, p.76 qtd. In Casanave 201).



Casanave, C. (2004). Controversies in second language writing: Dilemmas and decisions in research and instruction. Ann Harbor: The University of Michigan Press, 195-235.

Ferris, D. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to truscott. Hamp-Lyons, L. (1995). Rating nonnative writing

Ferris makes a good argument for further research into the effectiveness and appropriateness of using error correction in the teaching of writing and particularly in the teaching of writing to L2 students. After reading her article, I would like to pose a few questions for thought to everyone.

1)Why is it important that teachers correct student grammar in their texts?

2)If you do not consider error correction to be an important aspect of teaching writing, why do you feel this way?

3) Is it possible that there would be no ill effects if teachers simply ceased to perform acts of error correction with their students?

4) At what point did you become aware of the value or detriment of error correction in your own educational experience?


Hamp-Lyons made an interesting argument about the value (or lack therof) of holistic scoring. She argued that conventional methods of holistic scoring do not support fully comprehensive and accurate assessments of student writing capabilities.

When you score student writing, what elements are you actually evaluating?

What biases might you bring to your analyis of a student's text that might differ from those of another teacher reading and evaluating the same text?

I have had instances where I have receieved completely opposite reviews on the exact same text from different professors, have you? If so, how did you come to an understanding about how two people could have such disparate views on the same text?

Williams: Speaking, Writing, and Hybrid forms of interaction

While I can understand the idea that speaking carries a good deal more pressure in the classroom than perhaps writing does, I still think it is important to encourage speaking in the classroom. When we speak to students, we should monitor our own speech and take note of whether or not we are providing them with an appropriate language model to refer to as they practice their own oral skills. Kumaravadivelu (2006) suggested that by encouraging students to attempt oral production we would be encouraging them to process the target language at a much higher cognitive level.

I can definitely see the value of online chatting as a conversation tool for practicing second language skills. There is a lower risk in using spoken language forms in an online chat situation than in the classroom. People in chat forums tend to expect that the person they are conversing with may take some time in responding. People rarely feel the need to correct other people’s speech in a chat forum, though students would probably take note of the forms and structures most commonly used. This would be a fairly safe space for second language students. I’ve felt less constrained by my own feelings of uncertainty in my L2’s when I chat with people from Germany or German speaking areas online. Also, interestingly, people seem to be far more admiring of second language learners online than in the classroom. Online, people sometimes want to learn how many languages their conversation partner speaks. Bilingualism, biliteracy, and multi-lingualism tend to be praised.

Chapter 4: Reading to Write

I was really interested in Hirvela's chapter 4 on Reading to Write. I strongly believe the way I read and the variety of literature I read influence the way that I write. When I was younger, I would read all kinds of humorous adventure stories from the children's section of our Free Library. At some point, my mother began showing me how to use her typewriter (because I thought it was interesting) and I began typing up one-two page adventure stories of my own. The style that I used to write my stories was reflective of the style shown by the authors I had been reading. My stories were pretty funny and engaging, but they usually ended in "to be continued..." as I was still learning about writing and keeping a focus and developing all these other aspects that go into creating a prolonged narrative. I would definitely consider my experience under the term "reading for writing" as described by Carson(1993).

I especially love the quote by Kroll(1993)that, "one can read a text not only to 'learn' its content but to 'learn' choices that writers have made in producing it" (113).I would actually love be able to give first year students a book list to have read before the start of class. I do not think that many beginning students read enough...to be fair, I don't think most people in general read enough. I'm not quite sure why summer reading is required in high school (at least my high school) and not in college for undergraduates. Students often complain about class readings, fail to complete readings, or have trouble understanding readings because they do not read much outside of the classroom. Reading on a regular basis would probably make it a less jarring experience during the semester.

Chapter 1: An Overview of Reading-Writing Connection

Reading and writing are both acts of composing. One act informs and influences the other. That seems to be the suggestion in this chapter. It’s amazing how differently we think about the act of reading in comparison to the way they thought in 1983. How could reading ever be passive? I am a very active reader. Either I’m actively engaged in a text, or I am actively resistant to reading a text but I’m never a passive reader. The best texts are the ones that coax you to be an active reader and get engaged in a dialogue with the text or the author or the concepts presented in the text.

This is why I wish I could give my students a required reading list like I was required to have during my summers in high school. Reading a variety of texts helped develop my writing skills, my vocabulary, my form, and my style. I love to read; partially because I love the way my reading is reflected in some of the things that I write. Reading allows me to observe and take note of what other writers do in their texts and invites me to try on some of those ways of writing and meaning-making. I can barely fathom the thought of “reading teachers”. Who are they? It is hard for me to see reading and writing being taught in two separate classes. I mean, some people argue that this is what we have going in between composition and literature. Some people see literature courses as just reading a lot of different books, and see composition as just writing a lot of papers. Both of those things do happen, but they are definitely not happening in isolation from each other.

Hirvela says, “one of the best ways to improve writing is to improve reading” (11). I have been thinking what hirvela is saying for a while now. What is our job? This is an idea that Hirvela brings up in chapter one. I am constantly wondering, “What is our job?” It has become obvious that many college students are coming to us straight from high school with poor reading and writing skills. There is always a debate about what exactly our obligation is to these students. Personally, I want to make them read more, take vocabulary quizzes, and work on using academic English not only on paper but in classroom discussion. The reading, I think, will expand their vocabulary and provide them with more ways to express themselves and more ways to construct meaning.

Casanave Chapter 3: Paths to Improvement

The criteria for good writing are ambiguous because that criterion necessarily varies according to the critic and the culture. As I read this chapter, I was most interested in the Casanave’s assertion that teachers, “can attend to different criteria selectively, according to who the students are, why they are writing, what they are writing, and whom they are writing for” (67). Personally, I think that it is very important to be able to situate yourself and your teaching practices within the context you are working. Everything you do with your students needs to be as relevant as possible to their needs which are certain to vary from course to course and location to location. Successful teachers will realize that they cannot and should not attempt to teach everything at once.

Matsuda Chapter 1- Writing Development and Biliteracy

As I read through this chapter, I kept being struck by the acknowledged fact that we just don’t do the things that need to be done for our L2 students if our goal really is to help them become bilingual in their first language and English. The authors admit that school teachers are rushed to quickly make students proficient within a year to three years when they know that it takes more time than that to give student learners an enduring learning experience that will cover more than surface issues. It is so frustrating to even think about education at times, because there are so many things that need to be done that people in power have been told need to done but those things just are not considered a priority.

I liked the idea of having students write in a code-switching style, it does seem like it could encourage the expansion and development of biliterate writing skills in a more flexible and less pressured way. I definitely agree that teachers should avoid looking at students as if they are deficient as they go through natural processes of learning to write coherently and fluently in their target language. Scientists make a living of repeating experiments with failing results until the process gets more and more refined with the end result of a successful experiment. Language learning requires trial and error, especially considering that culturally embedded meanings and connotations are built into any language.

I was very empathetic when I read the translation of one student’s poem on spring. It was so beautiful and eloquent in English that I can only imagine how wonderful it would be if I could read and understand it in its native Chinese language. When I wrote in German or Russian, I would also tend to write in English first to fully capture my expressions because I could not achieve the same depth with my L2 until I became more fluent in them. I was extremely proud one day when I managed to freestyle a poem in German that was equally eloquent when translated into English. It kept to a rhyme scheme and it made sense, it was like winning the language lottery when it came to classroom achievement. It had been a risk to attempt because the teacher had offered to allow us to write creatively if we would like and I suggested we try to write poems. The entire class looked at me as if I should be stoned for suggesting something as difficult as to produce a piece of creative writing in a foreign language. The teacher said he wouldn’t force anyone to write creatively if they did not want to but he let me know that he would enjoy seeing what I could come up with if I wanted to try. He was thrilled with my product, but I think he was even more thrilled by my willingness to attempt the process and the effect my success had on my classmates willingness to become more flexible with the language.