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.