Hi Chris and list
In fact, what may be at issue here (and something I've recently written
about) is an adequate social practice approach to writing in higher
education. I'm going to selectively quote from a piece of mine under
review somewhere (so ignore the lack of coherence)
The academic literacies practitioner-researchers have brought these
critical literacy perspectives into HE to explore the multiple and
contested forms of knowledge production that mass higher education now
demands of a culturally and linguistically diverse student body. Lillis
(2001) identifies this social practice approach as emphasizing the
following characteristics of writing in HE:
• Student writing as a social act
• Language as constructing meanings/identities
• Literacies as numerous, varied and socially/institutionally
situated
• The socio-historically situated notion of essayist literacy
within academia
• The contested nature of dominant academic conventions
Studies in this context have focused on the value of the academic
literacies approach to the current epistemological and cultural student
diversity in HE in emergent academic disciplines where essayist literacy
continues to be privileged despite its institutional obscurity and
questionable relevance to practice oriented and vocational fields
(Lillis 2001; Stierer & Lea 2000b; Street, Jones, & Turner 1999). Lillis
(2001), in particular has identified an ‘institutional practice of
mystery’ enacted by academics who provide purportedly clear (e.g. be
explicit) instructions about inherited and privileged writing practices
that are neither necessarily relevant to the discipline in question,
practiced by the academics themselves, nor understood by the student
cohort (also see Harwood & Hadley 2004; Ridley 2004; Winter 2003). Thus,
‘current pedagogic practices surrounding the setting and assessing of
written assignments work towards confusing rather than illuminating the
conventions student-writers are expected to write with’ (Lillis 2001
p.169).
Although there is a range of spoken and textual genres that articulate
knowledge production in HE, it is textual genres which are privileged in
the history and current practices of academic scholarship. In academic
literacy studies, Norman Fairclough’s (1989) three level
characterization of the mutual dependencies between texts and processes
and social conditions of interpretation and production has become a
common framework for academic literacy studies (e.g. Lillis 2001). In
this framework (see figure 1 below), the formal linguistic and
rhetorical properties of the text may be treated by faculty, established
academic disciplines, HE institutions, and skills based approaches (see
table 1 above) as transparently objectified. However, texts respond to
the processes of production and interpretation, which characterize the
immediate context of situation. In Bakhtinian terms (Bakhtin,
Voloshinov, Medvedev, & Morris 1994; Ball & Freedman 2004), the text
dialogically addresses and is addressed by this context of situation;
addressivity is indicated below by the arrows. In turn, the text and
this context of situation itself addresses and is addressed by a context
of culture characterized by multiple communicative repertoires (Lea &
Street 1998).
The practical implications of this social practice approach to writing
in HE have now begun to emerge with practitioner researchers producing
pedagogical models of writing instruction consistent with the academic
literacies position particularly in practice-oriented disciplines (e.g.
Coffin, Curry, & Goodman 2002; Lea 2004; Rai 2004). Drawing on Kress &
Van Leeuwen’s (1995; 2001) characterization of the conceptual design
space as one where critique contributes to creative design propositions,
Lillis (2003) suggests that academic literacies studies needs to move
towards designerly pedagogic propositions about student writing.
The social practice approach is particularly relevant to dissertation
writing in the emergent fields of doctoral design. This is a context
where non-traditional students engage in practice-oriented studies and
creative projects where academic conventions are currently contested
(Biggs & Mostaq 2007; Cross 1999; Dallow 2003; Durling 2002; Newbury
1996; Roth 1999). In the context of figure 1 above, the texts of design
research (layer 1) can be distinctive in their visual, textual and
material weighting, particularly in practice-oriented doctorates. In the
processes of interpretation and production (layer 2), the supervision
relationship and other peer and faculty support relationships are
currently characterized by significant variation in faculty and student
expertise, experience and scholarship, and this has an effect on text
production. Finally, the current sociocultural conditions of genre
production (layer 3) for design are characterized by debate,
contestation and uncertainty, as noted above. This includes the fact
that in the Australia context of culture design research has little
resonance,
will let the list know when more comes but also in the meanwhile the
agda piece I mentioned before also touches on these issues
Dr Gavin Melles
Research Fellow, Faculty of Design
Swinburne University of Technology
-----
Swinburne University of Technology
CRICOS Provider Code: 00111D
NOTICE
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and intended only for
the use of the addressee. They may contain information that is
privileged or protected by copyright. If you are not the intended
recipient, any dissemination, distribution, printing, copying or use is
strictly prohibited. The University does not warrant that this e-mail
and any attachments are secure and there is also a risk that it may be
corrupted in transmission. It is your responsibility to check any
attachments for viruses or defects before opening them. If you have
received this transmission in error, please contact us on +61 3 9214
8000 and delete it immediately from your system. We do not accept
liability in connection with computer virus, data corruption, delay,
interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised amendment.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
|