Composition at the turn of the 21st century fulkerson
Answers
Answered by
0
Fulkerson, Richard.
"Summary and Critique: Composition at the Turn of the Twenty-first
Century." CCC 56.4 (2005): 654-687.
Fulkerson’s ten-year follow-up to earlier reports on the condition
of composition studies concludes with premonitions about the field’s
disunity and the "new theory wars" (681). As a "map [of] a
large and complicated region" (679), "Composition at the Turn of the
Twenty-First Century" advances speculative claims (probabilities?) based
on what Fulkerson calls "indirect evidence." Given that he ends up
mentioning North’s 1987 concerns in The Making of Knowledge about the
sustainability of composition studiesgiven methodological pluralism,
it’s worth raising questions about just how different "indirect evidence" is
from "lore"–the tacit knowledge circulated informally by practitioners
who represented the largest segment of the field (rel. to researchers and
scholars). Fulkerson suggests that the divergence in the field at the turn of
the twenty-first century goes well beyond methodologies, extending to matters "axiological,
pedagogical, and processual" (681).
Fulkerson admits "frustration" as his motivation for trying to make
sense of the field every ten years. He compares two teaching sourcebooks,
"Summary and Critique: Composition at the Turn of the Twenty-first
Century." CCC 56.4 (2005): 654-687.
Fulkerson’s ten-year follow-up to earlier reports on the condition
of composition studies concludes with premonitions about the field’s
disunity and the "new theory wars" (681). As a "map [of] a
large and complicated region" (679), "Composition at the Turn of the
Twenty-First Century" advances speculative claims (probabilities?) based
on what Fulkerson calls "indirect evidence." Given that he ends up
mentioning North’s 1987 concerns in The Making of Knowledge about the
sustainability of composition studiesgiven methodological pluralism,
it’s worth raising questions about just how different "indirect evidence" is
from "lore"–the tacit knowledge circulated informally by practitioners
who represented the largest segment of the field (rel. to researchers and
scholars). Fulkerson suggests that the divergence in the field at the turn of
the twenty-first century goes well beyond methodologies, extending to matters "axiological,
pedagogical, and processual" (681).
Fulkerson admits "frustration" as his motivation for trying to make
sense of the field every ten years. He compares two teaching sourcebooks,
Similar questions