|
|
Post by watson56 on Oct 18, 2012 9:32:01 GMT -5
How do our choices for the terms we use to characterize the writing as "student writing" affect the way we treat that writing? I think this also relates to Brandt's statement about what students might write and accomplish with their writing.
|
|
|
|
Post by preterite on Oct 18, 2012 10:38:30 GMT -5
I think the rhetorical choice to do so gives an indication of how value is being appropriated and by whom. It suggests that -- in the economic cycle of production, distribution, use, and re-production -- the student appropriates value-as-learning at the moment of production and appropriates value-as-credentialing at the moment of use (receiving a passing grade on it) and then the instructor-researcher appropriates value at the moment of re-production (incorporating it into an academic essay), production (deepening her own understanding of composition as a field), and distribution (once it goes out to the journals, it can show up on the cv), and then those who read the article appropriate the article's value and the value of the student's writing in its moment of use, and then the article is cited and re-produced by other scholars. So noting that it is "student" writing highlights one of those moments of the appropriation of value.
|
|
