This collection of forty-two essays (some previously published; others written specifically for this text) includes issues of literacy and cognition, definitions of what basic writing is and how to teach it, ways that error and grammar fit into basic writing classrooms, and pedagogical strategies. The text includes essays by David Bartholomae, Anne E. Berthoff, Patricia Bizzell, Kenneth Bruffee, Robert Connors, Lisa Ede, Paolo Freire, Karen Greenberg, Patrick Hartwell, Glynda Hull, Andrea Lunsford, Sondra Perl, Mike Rose, Mariolina Salvatori, Mina Shaughnessy, Lynn Troyka, and others. As Theresa Enos writes in her Preface, "The Sourcebook aims to build upon Shaughnessy's contributions to the study of basic writing by gathering together the best of contemporary research, theory, and practice on the subject" (v).
Fox argues that contemporary calls for "standards" work against providing broader, more equitable access to higher education. The book is divided into five chapters, with the first three developing a critique of standards in both historical and contemporary contexts and the second two sketching how work for access can be carried out in both pedagogy and writing program administration. The book concludes with a brief comment on the need for perseverance in committed educators-that is, "staying around is half the battle" (114)-and four observations about change: stubborn persistence is necessary; alliances are important; preparation for confrontation helps student survival; and survival is possible with strategic choices about which battles to fight.
The essays in this volume speak directly to the debilitating assumptions that place basic writing students and teachers, and the discipline itself, on the margins of educational, economic, and political localities of influence. The collection is designed to present readers with various previously published essays that depict the fundamental and shifting theoretical, methodological, and pedagogical assumptions of basic writing instruction over the past two decades. Beginning with essays published between 1987 (after the publication of A Sourcebook for Basic Writing Teachers [102]) and 1997, the book is arranged roughly chronologically, from Adrienne Rich's 1979 "Teaching Language in Open Admissions" [110] to Jacqueline Jones Royster and Rebecca Greenberg Taylor's 1997 "Constructing Teacher Identity in the Basic Writing Classroom" [31]. The collection seeks to historicize the preceding decades of scholarship and also anticipate the future of the field. Essays examine such issues as defining basic writers, the phenomenology of error, cognitivism and writing instruction, the social construction of remediation, and the politics of basic writing pedagogy in a postmodern world. They collectively speak to some of the most enduring and important debates in the field of basic writing. At the same time, they illustrate that neither the basic writing classroom nor recent scholarship need be intellectually marginalized locations. The contributors claim the "margin"-the basic writing classroom-as a borderland, a site of contention and negotiation that allows for a cultural and pedagogical reflection and critique not available to them in more centrally located sites in English departments.
Henry argues that two opposing approaches to reading instruction-whole-language and skills-based-pervade discussions of reading pedagogy. Drawing on her semester-long study of eighteen students enrolled in a developmental reading course at Northern Kentucky University in the early 1990s, Henry argues that the whole-language approach to reading instruction promoted student development by creating students who were interested in reading, suggesting that student readers can strengthen their abilities to understand and interpret texts, though each must develop at his or her own pace. Examining 420 "literary letters" exchanged between students and their instructor (an activity described in Nancie Atwell's In the Middle), Henry discovered that it is easiest to engage students with reading when they can select the topic for reading and the pace at which they will read and when the books students find most interesting are available in the classroom. She also discovered that teachers need to read the same books their students read so that they can correspond intelligently with students and further assimilate into the community of classroom readers. Students conceived of their instructor as an interested reader because they were all reading the same books. A comparison of pre- and postclass diagnostic examination scores and anonymous student evaluations of Henry's class indicate a marked development in students' reading levels over the course of the semester, thus suggesting that the way to improve reading skills is to read as much and as often as possible. Reading instruction, then, must be approached differently to privilege "real" reading.
Writing is a central feature of all education, and students affect their other educational endeavors when they make improvements as effective writers. To that end, teachers of writing need procedural and content knowledge blended with a thorough grounding in theory and a diverse fund of life knowledge and experience. Teachers also need to monitor and evaluate cognitive and affective student progress at all stages of the teaching and learning process and make ongoing adjustments in teaching practice and philosophy. "Gateway activities"-detailed sets of assignments and exercises that lead students in carefully measured steps toward learning that compels engaged writing-help teachers give students the guidance and support necessary to move beyond the level at which they could learn independently.
This germinal book provides important perspectives in the history of basic writing research. It includes essays by Sondra Perl, Arthur Dixon, Milton Spann and Virginia Foxx, Patrick Hartwell, Harry Crosby, Nancy Johnson, Rexford Brown, Constance Gefvert, Kenneth Bruffee, and E. Donald Hirsch, each of which focus on different elements of basic writing and basic writers from cognitive studies to examinations of writing program and writing center practice.
A collection of essays from twelve front-line composition instructors, this text is a dynamic dialogue among the authors as they address each others' ideas, concepts, and research- and theory-grounded pedagogy while drawing the reader into specific approaches to teaching writing and research processes and strategies to a diverse student population. Contributors include Eleanor Agnew, Akua Duku Anoyke, Sharon Dean, Donna Dunbar-Odom, Barbara Gleason, Alan Hirvela, Michelle Hall Kells, Kate Kiefer, Donna LeCourt, Margaret McLaughlin, Maureen Neal, Mike Palmquist, Carolyn Pari, Randall Popken, Victor Villanueva, and Barbara Wenner.
This text is most useful now as a resource documenting the state of basic writing scholarship in the late 1970s and mid-1980s. Although the book bears a publication date of 1991, its ten bibliographic essays (and appendix) are heavily weighted with research and scholarship considerably earlier than the date of publication. The Sourcebook was written when basic writing was experiencing a resurgence; thus, it documents the dominant approach to basic writing extensively. Woven into many of the chapters are emphases on linguistics, "new grammars" and sentence combining, cognitive psychology, and the the City College of New York "origins" of basic writing interest and instruction, an origination that has been subsequently contested. The Sourcebook constitutes a useful artifact of a certain period in basic writing scholarship.
Rich brings a narrative vision and quality rarely found in scholarship on basic writing. We see through her experiences the "graffiti-sprayed walls of tenements" (8) and "the uncollected garbage" (3) on the streets of New York and witness the lives of students and teachers as they come together to make sense out of the circumstances of their collective educational endeavors in the Seek for Evaluation, Education & Knowledge (SEEK) program at the City College of New York in 1968. Rich describes the larger social, political, and human contexts of that time and formulates many of the questions that continue to demand scholars' attention in basic writing scholarship. Rich articulates a condition of education that is characterized by institutional racism and classism. Rich cites Paulo Freire, insisting that students need to learn to use language for critical reflection, and calls on educators to reassess their methods and materials for teaching. At the same time, her narrative demands that basic writing scholars work at their own critical self-reflection.
This examination of the idea of "underpreparedness" in a range of educational schools and systems also explores Rose's own experiences as a student who was erroneously placed in the vocational education track. He suggests that lower-track classes create a self-fulfilling prophesy for most students who might, if challenged to succeed, do well in advanced classes. Among the issues Rose discusses are the problems encountered by students whose improvised backgrounds provide little context for the ideas and language they encounter in the academy. By explaining his personal challenges and his experiences with various mentors, Rose illustrates how he worked to master academic language and ideas. Rose uses his experiences as a student and a teacher as evidence for a critique of conceptions of literacy used in contemporary education. He suggests that students labeled "underprepared" are inexperienced with the expectations of the academy, that literacy crises running through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were manufactured and deflect other concerns, and that schools must work with students differently.
Rejecting the medical metaphor, Shaughnessy articulates varied definitions of basic writers and writing among institutions and over time. She establishes 1964 as the year when the "new" remedial English began. The essay defines the population of basic writing students, characterizes instructors and instructor training, and notes that little had been published before 1976 on this rich area of potential research. The essay identifies three major components of research to that point and suggests readings on these: classroom environment, methods of instruction, and focus on prewriting. Throughout, Shaughnessy emphasizes the challenges faced by students identified as basic writers and suggests that traditional instructors rethink their approaches to better accommodate these writers. The essay closes with an in-depth discussion of selected readings for instructors on classical studies of language, readings on grammar, readings on language in various social settings, and readings on writing. Most of the cited articles remain classics in the field. Shaughnessy sums up the main point of the essay: "The 'remediation' of basic writers' teachers may, in fact, be the most important education going on today" (167).
Shaughnessy takes teachers through writing problems such as poor handwriting and punctuation, syntax, common errors, spelling and vocabulary errors, and lack of idea development. While her focus is primarily on error, it is underscored by a sensitive understanding of the reasons behind the rhetorical and linguistic difficulties discussed and a strong belief in the inherent intelligence of learners described as "basic writers." Shaughnessy's claims about the difficulties faced by basic writers are supported by examples from thousands of student papers. Examples of many kinds of errors are provided. Each chapter also includes suggestions for the teacher on how to reduce the particular kind of error discussed in that specific chapter. Shaughnessy also explains why these errors occur by examining the rules that are manifested in students' writing. The book also contains an appendix that includes suggestions for placement essay topics and also contains suggested readings for the teacher of basic writing.
Two conflicting visions or theories of learning compete for prominence in the nation's schools. The dominant or official theory claims that learning is based on individual effort and hard work, which includes memorization, repetition, drills, and standardized tests. A recent by-product of the industrial revolution, the official view embraces a crisis-driven, systematic approach to efficient learning-learning that is often forgotten with the passage of time. In contrast, the classic or traditional theory views learning as an ongoing social process that is unpremeditated, experiential, effortless, equitable, based on self-image, and inhibited by testing. While the official theory of learning spawns hierarchical systems of education, the classic view generates more democratic forms of education. Teachers, parents, and students are best positioned to examine current educational practices to transform those that hinder the democratic process.
Smith's book sets out to demystify the writing process. In doing so, he gives his own version of that process and the difficulties writers have with it. The key to Smith's approach for writers is a change in self-image, a reconceptualization of themselves as "writers" and connection to a larger community of writers, and a recognition of writing as a more recursive and ongoing process than originally perceived. Smith utilizes learning theory and linguistics to investigate what writing entails at both the physical and the mental levels.
Writing as coeditor of the Journal of Basic Writing (first with Karen Greenberg and then with George Otte), Smoke surveys seven years of JBW (1994-2001), a time when the journal became "more theoretical and political" (88). Looking back, Smoke highlights some of the most important issues in basic writing: the demise of open admissions at the City University of New York, tracking versus mainstreaming, a reappraisal of Mina Shaughnessys work, and the elimination of basic writing programs (and hence basic writers). Smoke asserts that research in the field has entered into "metaanalysis" and that scholarship has begun to "historicize" basic writing. Smoke concludes with a tribute to JBW and its role as she turns over her editorship to Bonne August.
After briefly laying out the politics of basic writing, the diversity of basic writers, and top-down versus skills-focused pedagogies, Uehling outlines the 21-year history of the Conference on Basic Writing, a special-interest group of the Conference on College Composition and Communication. Moving from "Early History and Original Goals" and a "Brief Chronology," Uehling devotes most of the essay to CBWs current goals and activities, especially its communicative ones-such as its newsletter, sponsorship of book projects, electronic discussion list, and electronic journal, Web site, annual meeting, and workshops at CCCC. Included is a history of the national basic writing conference that began in 1985 and were eventually cosponsored by CBW.