I personally wonder if having FYC students approach writing from the often times unfamiliar and extremely theoretical viewpoint of "rhetoric studies" isn't asking too much in terms of true comprehension and application. It's very easy for us--meaning English grad students and faculty--to see the wizard behind the curtain for what he is. These kids, though... I start talking about the rhetorical choices made in Steele's essay on sovereignty, and it's truly as if some of them are listening to the voice of Oz with no ability to conceive of how his voice got so loud or his head so big.
This is why I am in favor of classes in literature which teach students by way of application, instead of direct explication, about rhetoric and composition. I've taught classes in which the word "rhetoric" was never even used, and yet the students left with the capability to write a rhetorically sound argument.
There's just something about advocating for rhetoric as "the thing itself" that seems to push the concept too far into abstraction to help a lot of the students who are arriving in FYC.
No comments:
Post a Comment