Voice

The question is how do we define voice in academic writing. Academic, in-class writing, such as term papers or short assignments are always bound by so many criteria,that in order to succeed, one has to follow the voice set by these criteria.To roughly define voice, one could say that it is a very private space in which the author inhabits.As Dr. Rickly was saying in class today,by taking chunks of academic writing from here and there, she managed to pool a paper which had the voice of an academic paper, and it got published.Therefore,one can conclude that there is no place for this private space in academics. I would like to say that academic writing in-general is voiceless, or rather trained to be voiceless. But as it was mentioned in class today, there is a recent shift towards voiced writing in academics. Given this premise, a teacher of composition is now faced with the concern of how much voice should be a standard for academic writing. As Elbow points out that to create voice in your writing you need to forget the audience and get it all out on the paper. Then refine it later. My question here is when you are going back to revise it, are you not losing some of that voice to conform to academic standards?

Also, a pertinent point in class today was that if freshmen, of eighteen or nineteen years of age have a well formed voice? If not, then how can/ or how well can it be reflected in their writing. Then, the concern of liking and not liking your own voice also comes into play. Most people as Elbow points out are at first not comfortable of their real voice. He does say that one grows more comfortable with time, and with lots of free writing, but sometimes writers, especially, a writer belonging to the minority culture might never feel at home with his own voice within a dominant cultural setting.This can perhaps be attributed to the lack of contact zones within the setting.

To conclude,it is important to have a voice, otherwise honesty in writing is lost,but it is also important to train that voice to meet academic criteria.

Constructs of First Year Composition

First year composition courses can be viewed as an introduction to the key writing/ rhetorical concepts that can be applied within and across disciplines. First year composition is taught with the basic premise of making students equipped to use academic writing conventions. Other learning outcomes for FYC are critical reading, writing connections, shaping and communicating meaning and effective use of reflective practices.
Given the basic premises, all FYC programs should aim at teaching the meaning making process through writing. Students in the academia need to understand the power of writing as a medium of communicating their ideas effectively. Our FYC program is built on little blocks of writing concepts like summarizing and paraphrasing that build up to a bigger idea of creating an argument with a proper thesis and its components.

Here, I would like to point out that we are not really giving expressive writing a chance as we are focusing on formalist writing more. But I believe, we can include some kind of expressive writing in class in forms of free writing or journal writing. This will not only give students a chance to explore into their creative dimensions, but will also strike a balance to the kind of formal writing they are doing. Writing for me, is the methodology and the assignments a tool to foster an intellectual consciousness among students and organize their social space.

A Working Philosophy of Composition

My personal teaching philosophy centers on the idea of creating a way to democratize a discourse community by empowering each member with the tool of language. My pedagogical beliefs rest with this critical power of composition writing that accounts for a historical shift in understanding the rhetorical elements.

Philosophy of composition is closely allied with the rhetorical elements of language act in its very conception. The rhetorical aspect of language act can be defined as comprising speaker/author; listener/reader; text; context. Theorists and scholars, however, have explicated these basic level concepts to theory level discussions. Hence, we see Richard Fulkerson’s expressive, mimetic, rhetorical and formalist applications of composition; and, James Berlin’s constructs of Classicist, Expressionist, Current Traditionalist and New Rhetoric. The philosophy is a combined voice that not only affirms that truth is not proprietary, but also that its existence is collaboratively created by the author, the audience, the language, and the reality.

I view composition as a discourse in progress enacted through writing. In composing, we deal with words that are semantically manipulative in terms of contexts: cultural, social, and political. Similarly, syntax and diction play a key role in influencing the act of composing a (written) text. So the composition for piece of historical drama would receive different varied interpretations based on the genre in which the composition is made. In view of these major epistemological constructs, the philosophy of composition can emerge as a function of one or more dominant elements of language act. For me, the starting point of shaping my own teaching philosophy is the notion of liberatory pedagogy. It aims at a collaborative approach to meaning making process. Under this notion, the teacher can serve as enabler of “socially constructed” knowledge, rather than acting as constraining force.

In closing, I would like to respond to the question of three important concepts that play key roles in my teaching—
“growth” (as an evolving nature of the act of composing); “process” (distinct from the recursive aspect, but more as a tool of inquiry into a context/subject matter); and “tone” (as creating a unique content in writing through an informed act of selecting and ordering diction and information).