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.

The Legacy of First Year Composition

While I was reading the legacy of first year composition, my first thought was a flashback to when I worked in the writing center and wondered why we (student writing center consultants) were receiving training to work with ESL students and special needs students, but professors were not. I used to wonder why the university saw nothing amiss with having student workers trained to tutor students in need of second language assistance but not bothering to offer courses to facilitate a more efficient and useful educational experience for those students. I still often wonder why more teachers are not required to receive this kind of training.

When it comes to oral proficiency being neglected in favor of writing, I am disturbed for both L1 and L2 students. Many first year students do not know how to speak and represent themselves orally in a professional manner. Only recently has this been addressed in L1 first year curriculums so I can only imagine how L2 oral training has been similarly neglected. Too often, students are trained primarily to write and, while writing is important, have no idea what to do when they need to make a coherent verbal argument. In the situation of the nursing student, Yang, she would have benefited from some courses that could address areas of communication that would prove most relevant to her nursing program. While I’m not really sure if the problem was that people couldn’t understand her accent rather than that they wouldn’t understand her accent, she would have benefited (as would any student I think) from being able to engage in spoken dialogue and oral presentation in her classes. I say this as someone who personally hates giving presentation; it helps to hear yourself talk as you consciously address an audience with purpose. That experience can give you something that you don’t necessarily pick up on when engaging in casual conversation.

According to Leki, assigning arbitrary topics in compulsory writing courses encourages plagiarism? Hmmm…I can see how that might happen. I think giving students arbitrary topics can lead to a lack of motivation. It’s like giving busy work, and when students are given busy work they resent it and they put as little effort into it as possible. A lot of the literature says that motivation has a lot to do with student learning and development. I like when the authors discuss why it doesn’t make sense to relegate writing to the freshman year when the freshman year is when most students haves courses that do not require them to use the writing they are learning. When I began college as a freshman, I was lucky enough to be put into an experimental “Cluster” course. I had one group of classmates with whom I took three classes, all intertwined. We took Writing 2, Geography, and Religions of the world. The courses were taught somewhat collaboratively in theme and we were made to apply the lessons of each class to the other classes. I am a staunch supporter of teachers working collaboratively to develop lessons which can be taken out of one classroom and applied or connected in another. Students wonder all the time what the importance is of the classes they are required to take and what possible connection there could be between subject A and subject B.

Politics, Perspectives, and Expectations in the Classroom

Chapter 14-Institutional Politics in the Teaching of Advanced Academic Writing: A Teacher-Researcher Dialogue

I was really interested in the discussion about the author’s perception of her role in the class. When it comes to the politics of the L1 or L2 classroom, the discussion usually focuses on the power of the professor and the powerlessness of the students. Rarely does the discussion turn towards the expectations of the students in the class, their expectations of the professor, fellow classmates, and themselves. The expectations that students and faculty carry into the classroom with them do have a profound impact on the interactions that take place in the classroom.
I’m not sure how other students orient themselves when they enter into a new class, but I tend to evaluate the professor, the professor’s stated and implied expectations, my classmates’ backgrounds as they are presented during the mandatory class introduction, and my perception of my own role within this framework.

I was also really interested in the way that the author acknowledged how low of a priority her class was considered in comparison with the rest of the load being carried by her students. I’m not sure that I can imagine feeling anything less than discouraged at the thought that my class needed to balance so very finely between being effective and being low pressure enough that students would choose to take rather than avoid it.

Student Interactions and The Issue of Plagiarism

Bringing out ESL voices through electronic writing

On page 165 of Casanave’s book, I found myself wondering why she felt that she needed to feel a sense of closeness or intimacy with the student Shuuichi in person to give full recognition to the voice he adopted when he communicated electronically. Personally, I do not view his “real world” shyness and formality as a detractor from his electronically transmitted voice of authority and educated debater. We have popular authors who write books for the masses and whose written voices would never match up with the idea you receive about that person when you meet them at a book signing. Voice, as we’ve discussed, is a very complex and multifaceted aspect of the writer. The way one writes is not always going to mimic the way one speaks, because these are two separate modes of communication and they tend to vary. Also, if we run with the idea that writing electronically allows students to develop another identity for themselves, why would we assume an automatic intimacy with a personality we have spent less than a year getting to know? On average, the amount of time an instructor gets to spend with a student, whether mainstream or non-mainstream is negligible. Sometimes, I think educators need to be more realistic in their goals and expectations of what they can accomplish with their student over a relatively brief period of time.

The case study debates over the benefits of electronic interactive writing versus that of the traditional classroom interaction seem to indicate that there is no way which is truly better than the other. Basically, it really depends on a number of variables including the members of the class and the teacher. Nothing works all the time for everyone, a concept we’ve also discussed. The key is to be flexible and open to the fact that what works with one class may stifle another and vice versa.

Students and Plagiarism

Whether they are mainstream American students, ESL students, or International students, students in general often have issues with the act of plagiarism. Plagiarism is one of those things that are talked about in hushed voices and usually only after a student has been punished or expelled over some act of plagiarism. Teachers rarely take the time to establish a comprehensive, working understanding of what constitutes plagiarism, why plagiarism is wrong and worthy of punishment, and why the punishments for plagiarism are so harsh. Everyone plagiarizes. There are very few new or novel arguments being made in the world that was not offered up by someone else in previous time. The whole concept of plagiarism largely rests on the ideas of intellectual property and copyrights. While students do need to learn proper ways of citation to join the conversations going on in the academic community and acknowledge the earlier contributions of other authors, they also need to learn what differentiates plagiarism from the rote memorization they were encouraged towards in earlier years of education.

Ramanthan and Atkinson: The Social Construction of Students Within and Outside the US

While reading the article Individualism, Academic Writing, and ESL Writers, I was struck by a sense of understanding for past experiences wherein the differences in underlying cultural expectations created a less than productive atmosphere between myself (a mainstream middle-class American) and my classmates (members of minority cultures valuing the collaborative achievement rather than individual achievement). In the whole of my academic career, the main goal has been to stand out as an individual for my individual diligence, intelligence, and talent. I can’t speak for everyone else, but my parents always made sure I knew that I needed to stand out and be progressive and successful as an individual with my success depending on own my individual achievements. Initially, the experience of having classmates who insisted that a collaborative achievement was much better than an individual achievement went entirely against the grain. It seemed illogical and irrational to me, because of the expectations that I had been raised with as well as the expectations that are implicit within the American educational system. Reading about these differences is a very good way to understand why approaches to teaching ESL writers with mainstream social concepts does not always work very productively.

After reading this article, I am very interested in reading more about communicative styles across cultures. I never put too much thought into what a cultural concept “voice” is before seriously considering the different ways in which we describe and use “voice” in American culture. One particularly striking point in this article is when the student Shen relates the way his American teachers would encourage him to “be himself” which in essence was encouraging him to develop a new self that would be able to reflect the social concepts of his American classroom. As an L2 writer coming from a country that does not require I gain any particular aptitude in another language, I have never truly been forced to recreate myself to reflect the social constructions of my adopted language. I cannot quite imagine what that must feel like.

I can also see where peer review can become an area of some awkwardness. Largely, I would posit that most mainstream American students go into peer review with an individual perspective and individual goals. They know the group will read their work and judge them, the individual, based on whatever they have submitted for review. However, they also seem to maintain the attitude that it is first and foremost their own intellectual property and suggestions (however valid or helpful) are simply that, suggestions. Personally, I have noted times when I’ve had my written work reviewed by mainstream American classmates and non-mainstream classmates that I receive very different feedback. Although all of my classmates may offer suggestions for revision, my mainstream American classmates are often quick to assure me that it is ultimately my work and my decision while my non-mainstream classmates are more often either reluctant to consider critiquing my work at all or quick to assure me that their suggestion is more of a necessity for my work and should definitely be implemented. According to the authors, NNS writers have been shown to approach peer review from a perspective which is far more embracing of the groups’ opinion and far more concerned with not disrupting the social atmosphere of the group. Looking back on those peer review experiences makes the section of the article dedicated to peer reviewing and individualism rather fascinating.

Contrastive Rhetoric

Contrastive Rhetoric: Reader vs. Writer Responsibility

While reading Casanave, one of the topics mentioned particularly stuck in my mind. As Casanave related John Hinds study of the differences between Japanese and English expository writing, I had a flashback to working in the Writing Center of my alma mater, Clarion University. We would often work with Asian students and Arabic students and find ourselves working to convince them to be more direct and explanatory in their writing. As American students, accustomed to a writing system that demands and expects the writer to lead the reader to new knowledge AND explain that new knowledge in such a way that a reader ignorant of the issue can fully understand the discussion, we were puzzled by the roundabout way those students were writing their essays. However, as Hinds explains, the burden of creating understanding is not on the writers in Japanese as it is in English. According to Hinds, contrastive rhetoric has a lot to do with the expectations of the reader. Now, Peter McCagg argues with Hind over whether or not Japanese puts more responsibility on the reader but I’m really not sure how I feel about his counterargument.

As we had been trained to do, we asked our Asian and Arabic students questions to help them develop their essays. At first, we did this because we thought they just had no idea what else to write. We were fascinated to learn, however, that the writing system in their L1 background made very different demands of them and that was why they were having a more difficult time producing essays agreeable to American essay expectations. So, I can see that it is important to have some awareness of pre-existing differences in writing expectations because that awareness allows educators to look further than the assumption that writing in an L2 is just difficult because of some cognitive inability to perform in the L2.

An interesting thing to note though is that American students often exhibit similar problems being direct with their writing and creating an understanding for the reader that does not rely primarily on the readers own ability to piece knowledge together. College freshman in the US are often reminded time and again about the importance of providing pertinent information, using transitional sentences, and not assuming that the reader has any prior knowledge of the subject being discussed.

Philadelphia Reads

My Literacy Narrative
The story of my literacy began when I was a baby. My mother and father were both college-educated which is something I believe affected my literacy as I grew and developed. My mother and father, as well as my two older sisters, would speak to me when I was a baby. They did not speak in “baby-talk”, but in fully expressed sentences. As I grew older, my mother would gently but promptly correct my syntax when I spoke to her. She worked across the street from our city’s largest public library and would often take me there to pick out children’s books. She made sure that I had a children’s library card, which I thought was the most magical thing ever as a child. I found out exactly how many books I could take out of the library at once, and I always took out the maximum number of books.
My mother encouraged my reading literacy by taking time to sit and read her own books quietly while I read my own book quietly. She entered me in reading challenges, offered by the library, which rewarded frequent readers with prizes. When I began attending middle school, my mother would allow me to type up fictional stories of my own creation and read them to her. My written literacy came both from my parents and from my Granny. I remember my Granny making me sit and practice writing in print and cursive. She would also work to correct my speaking errors and expand my spoken vocabulary.
My father influenced my spoken literacy considerably because he often spoke to me in his ‘legal’ voice. He was a district attorney for Philadelphia and later for Norfolk Virginia. Between my mother and father I learned a good deal about the difference between expressive speech and speech geared more towards argument making.
When I was in school, I drew largely on lessons in literacy that I had already learned from my parents. School was more of a reinforcement tool than the primary tool of my literacy education. Sometimes I think that this is the reason many children have such a difficult time learning to read and write expansively, they lack a foundation in spoken and written literacy from their family.
Another influence on my spoken and written literacy would have to be the neighborhoods I grew up in and the schools I attended. I have always been a part of a multicultural community and I think the literacy that develops in multicultural communities is very encouraging towards learning second language literacies. I found myself with Russian, Hispanic, Asian, and Italian classmates and I wanted to be multiliterate, though I had no idea what multi-literacy meant back then. As I moved up through school levels, I began to experience foreign languages like Spanish in middle school and French in the high school choir.
My high school established a four year language requirement so I took German for four years and I excelled in the language. I used it in school and I used it at home. Even though my mother could not understand the German language, she would listen to me when I spoke it to her. She praised and encouraged me, and she was a very big positive influence on my desire to learn and become proficient in other languages. In college, I tested into a high level of German and I continued to learn German. I even had a literature class in German dedicated to the story of Faust. In addition to German, I took an interest in Russian language because it was equally challenging to learn and I enjoy a challenge. I savored the process of learning to read, write, and speak in these strange new languages. My literacy is constantly evolving and growing through different experiences and interactions.

Controversies In Second Language Writing

The Intangible Internal Factors of the L2 Teacher

Casanave speaks a lot about the impact that the second language teacher’s background and ingrained personal beliefs have on their classroom. The teaching style used may or may not be in sync with the teacher’s professed teaching philosophy. This is something that carries a great deal of importance for the students and the second language teacher. Students pay attention to explicit expectations from their teachers and when they begin to sense implicit expectations that do not mirror the expectations they have been given through explicit instruction they can become confused and discouraged. On the same token, the teacher who may not realize that there is a discrepancy between their self professed teaching philosophy and the actual acts of their classroom teaching might also become confused about why the interactions with her students are not as productive as she might have expected.

Our individual personalities, our memories of our own educational upbringing, and various other variables related to our innate individuality all manage to materialize some way in our classrooms as we teach. According to Casanave, “whether we realize it or not at the time, these intangible internal factors influence decisions we make in the classroom” (11). Casanave posits that we bring our own experiences with second language learning into the classroom and this affects the way we believe our students should be taught and the way we decide our moral obligation to our students when teaching them. She talks about the way teachers can sometimes question their own teaching decisions as they wonder whether or not to make students do assignments that they did not enjoy when they were students. Many of the teaching decisions made involving class structure, materials used, and the enforcement of certain policies often depend upon the personal reaction of the teacher.

For example, in a recent Reflective Practice meeting titled, “If your course were a video game…” there were some very heated views on how engaging or entertaining a course should be. There were some teachers who were very excited about seeing in which ways they could make their class like a video game. By that, I mean challenging, engaging, rewarding, and a pleasurable experience that compels students to interactive in a positive and productive manner. To do this, some teachers were willing to consider giving bonus points, prizes, flexible options for writing and revision. Others, however, were somewhat outraged at the concept of “catering” to students with rewards and incentives beyond the negative punishments that would accompany a lack of participation and attendance. I would not go so far as to say that either group is inherently right or wrong in their views towards what proper teaching and learning should consist of, but I would say that their own feelings on learning and personal experiences with being taught might be a very real factor in their reactions.

I was fascinated by this chapter because it was so unerringly on point with a lot of issues I’ve been noticing when I observe teachers teaching or students learning or students discussing the way they are being taught. I can ever see the same kinds of thoughtful negotiations concerning teaching philosphy taking place during our graduate classes as we struggle to understand each others viewpoints and priorities even when they do not meet our own expectations and beliefs.