The readings this week address composition theory and pedagogy’s evolution from the elitism and exclusivity of being a predominantly current-traditional based male Anglo-American, product-focused disciplinary enterprise to becoming more inclusive of diversity and engaged with quotidian culture. George, Lockridge and Tirmbur’s observation of culture studies’ influence on composition pedagogies relates how the concern with common everyday life and culture amongst British Academics of the Center for Contemporary Culture in Birmingham University grew into a radical movement that critically analyzed class and race in local contexts. The impact of culture studies within composition theory now compels educators to take issues of difference and diversity seriously as an important component of composition pedagogy which has expanded to include, not only English as Subsequent Language Speakers, but post-colonial concerns with transnationalism and alternate forms of “Englishes.” Brodkey’s insistence that hierarchical teaching which disregards everyday outside world issues of race, class, and gender in the classroom perpetuates racism and classism, impeding the empowerment of marginalized students (by denying them the opportunity of communicating their experiences related to class and race through composition) further speaks to the necessity of bringing local contexts into mainstream composition pedagogy. Indeed criticism that even subversive movements in composition theory for access and inclusion have disregarded the input of women and minority ethnicities has led to a dialectical process of evolution for the white-male initiated emancipatory projects of critical, collaborative, and cultural studies informed pedagogies as conveyed by the works of Ann George, George, Lockridge and Tirmbur, and Kennedy and Howard.
The dilemma of just how to represent marginalized voices into composition pedagogy also surfaces in Royster’s article. Royster’s discussion of problematic issues arising from the white academics’ representation and activism on behalf of African-Americans for example relate the need to include the “authentic” voices and experiences of communities traditionally excluded from composition pedagogy, for each community brings with it diverse epistemologies that reflect particular cultures and life experiences. For composition pedagogy to be useful at all, it must reflect and engage with the particular life experiences of and genuine expression of its “subject” students. Sometimes this project extends to incorporating the collaboration of students in the teaching process as advocated by certain forms of critical pedagogy that seek to make composition instruction more student-focused and student-initiated, as George communicates. Although these approaches run into dilemmas premised on questions of authority in the classroom, they have also generated insights and improved the quality of composition instruction in many cases. Pedagogical aimed at greater inclusion have also sought to tackle social justice issues with composition pedagogy becoming a form of activism that seeks to foster activism amongst students. While leading to positive changes, these critical pedagogies, such as the Freirian approach, have also encountered criticism that insists on teachers fostering neutrality with respect to the political aspects of composition instruction. Thus composition pedagogies has to grapple with challenges involved in making education more accessible and inclusive of the common populace, marginalized communities and larger society as a whole. As Kennedy and Howard and Beach et al. attest, engaging with the public sphere and popular culture through the adoption and new and digital media is the most recent means of attempting to realize collaborative pedagogical enterprises that seek include a broader spectrum of society within its purview.
Word count: 545
manijasaidsite 