Expanding the Constructivist Metaphor: A Rhetorical Perspective on Literacy Research and Practice

Abstract

In this review we summarize some of the accomplishments and shortcomings of constructivist accounts of reading and writing activity as part of our argument for social and textual views of literacy. Arguing that reading and writing are inseparable from each other and from other modes of meaning making, we aim to fore ground studies and theories that depict the rhetorical dimensions of literacy. We define rhetorical as referring to the means and circumstances through which readers and writers represent and negotiate texts, tasks, and social contexts. A rhetorical perspective on literacy research and practice calls attention to the ways in which language use crystallizes relations between readers and writers. Such a perspective also brings into focus the extent to which the ways authors position themselves within a certain social space is contingent upon (a) authority (e.g., a disciplinary community's conventions for inquiry, the institution of school, or a writer's expertise). (b) the purposes that bring writers together within a particular social forum, and (c) the topic of their discourse or task at hand. In trying to expand the constructivist metaphor, we intend to contribute to a conceptual vocabulary and imagery for literacy research and practice that draw upon textual and intersubjective explanations of constructive activity in composing.

A Motivated Exploration of Motivation Terminology

“…Our first step in this exploration of motivation terminology was to determine what corpus of words from the extensive lexicon found within the motivation literature would guide our efforts. Unlike other researchers who have attempted to be more exhaustive in their analyses of language use within domains of inquiry (e.g., Alexander et al, 1991;Greene & Ackerman, 1995), we viewed this concentration to be advisable for several reasons. First, our reason for initially embarking on this review was to bring clarity to our programs of research that do not fall squarely within the realm of motivation.…”

What Can Be Learned From Informal Student Writings in a Science Context?

“…Taking up the argument that personal writing fosters more sustained inquiry into a topic than formal writing (Green & Ackerman, 1995), this study sets out to explore the potential informal writing tasks have in terms of science learning. We purposely selected science classes in which writing was not emphasized and the different modes of discourse characterizing each writing task were not formally studied.…”

Enhancing science literacy through implementation of writing-to-learn strategies: exploratory studies in high school biology

“…In being a visible representation of the world in a permanent product, writing is generally "a more responsible and committed act and.. .more readily a form and source of learning than talking" (Emig, 1977, p. 124). Greene and Ackerman (1995) argued "that reading and writing are inseparable from each other and from other modes of meaning making" (p. 383). With the previous arguments in mind, there is a need for students to take part in critical reading of science materials to identify claims and evidence, and there is also a need for students to practice constructing text as a means to make and demonstrate understanding of connections.…”

“…Looking at writing to learn from a cognitive perspective is criticized for neglecting the broader social and cultural influences. For example, Greene and Ackerman (1995) argued that the early model proposed by Flower and Hayes located contextual elements "on the periphery of activity" (p. 387).…”

“…From the interactive perspective, meaning is not construed by "the writer alone but in terms of interaction between writer and reader purpose, [that is,] not in terms of the text's semantic content but rather in terms of its semantic potential [emphasis his]" (p. 76). Greene and Ackerman (1995) argued that writers' positions in texts are influenced by 1) authority, through expertise or conventions of a community, 2) writers' purposes within a social context, and 3) the topic or task. With a similar critical analysis of the cognitive models, Giroux and McLaren (1992) related the argument to the social perspectives of discourse and language production, "as a socially organized and culturally produced human practice, language never acts on its own but only in conjunction with readers, their social locations, their histories, and their subjective needs and desires" (p. 15-16).…”