Russel K. Durst

Methods and Methodology in Composition Research

In original essays, fourteen nationally known scholars examine the practical, philosophical, and epistemological implications of a variety of research traditions. Included are discussions of historical, theoretical, and feminist scholarship; case-study and ethnographic research; text and conversation analysis; and cognitive, experimental, and descriptive research. Issues that cross methodological boundaries, such as the nature of collaborative research and writing, methodological pluralism, the classification and coding of research data, and the politics of composition research, are also examined. Contributors reflect on their own research practices, and so reflect the current state of composition research itself.

The Uses of Function: James Britton’s Category System and Research on Writing

The theoretical and empirical work of James Britton has been influential in promoting a view of writing as a means of learning and reflecting about subject matter. In detailing the heuristic potential of writing and the wide range of possible uses of writing, Britton’s work has played a significant role in countering the traditional view of writing instruction emphasizing mechanical correctness and the teaching of a rigid set of discourse forms. In particular, Britton’s theory of written discourse function has been used widely in research on writing and has made an important contribution to writing theory and pedagogy. Employed as a key variable in a host of empirical studies on writing, the function system has also been examined and critiqued in a number of theoretical studies. Yet the body of research in which the function system appears has never been analyzed systematically to determine what the theory has contributed to our understanding of how writing is learned and taught. In this review, we examine research employing or critiquing Britton’s theory. Studies are divided into four categories, centering on (a) the nature of school writing; (b) writing processes and written text structures; (c) connections between writing and learning; and (d) critiques of the function system. We also discuss ways in which the function theory could be improved and extended, and examine the theory’s relevance in light of critical issues in American education.

Reframing the Great Debate on First-Year Writing

WA hen composition began to be taught in American colleges and universities in the 19th century, the first-year course was so central to the field one could almost say it was the field. Over the past 50 years, since CCC first appeared, what we understand to constitute our field has changed dramatically into something more closely resembling other academic disciplines. Yet the first-year course which was our beginning has maintained its position at the center of our enterprise: most of our teachers teach it, most of our students study it, most of our textbook writers write for it, and most of our theoreticians theorize it. In addition, it is what we argue about most. A central argument in the field has revolved around the requirement of first-year writing. In several CCCC panels, journal articles, and an edited collection, such respected figures as Lil Brannon, Robert Connors, Sharon Crowley, and Charles Schuster have spoken against requiring first-year students to study composition. The course requirement, these scholars argue, frequently results in an oppressive arrangement in which grudging, uninterested students struggle through a curriculum focused on low-level skills in classes taught by poorly-supported faculty, typically adjuncts and graduate students. This arrangement, they suggest, helps perpetuate the demoted status of the composition course as a service activity rather than as part of a bona fide academic discipline.