Rhetoric, as the theory and practice of the discursive means of human influence, and science, as the observational study of the physical world, have traditionally been considered to exist in separate realms. In the past thirty years, however, theoretical convergences in the philosophy of rhetoric and the philosophy of science have yielded a discipline in the rhetoric of science—a discipline concerned with the discursive aspects of knowledge production and reproduction in the sciences. Rhetorical theory has argued convincingly in this century that all language in use is language for use and is therefore, to varying degrees, persuasive. The rhetoric of science begins from the assumption that persuasion is a factor in the construction of scientific knowledge, and from the belief that members of scientific communities (rhetorical communities in every sense) advocate versions of reality which are based in theory, formed in language, and dependent on the agreement of other scientists for their validation. This present project contributes to literature in the applied study of rhetoric of science by analyzing, from a rhetorical perspective, thirty-five scientific articles published in the last six years in major medical journals. (All of the articles are on the subject of primary—or functional—headache.) The project uses a methodology based on classical and contemporary theories of rhetoric to discover persuasive strategies in these scientific texts. It poses questions about how authorial intentions are actualized in scientific texts, how scientific texts have effects on readers, and how the texts affect the situations into which they are introduced. While scientific texts, like literary texts, could be analyzed from a variety of theoretical perspectives, rhetorical theory provides a particularly appropriate heuristic model for analyzing "real world" texts. The rhetorical analysis (which includes both an overview of the complete sample and three case studies) begins by questioning the extent to which the conventions of scientific prose (for example, use of the passive, of nominal iz at ions, of complex sentence structure; use of statistical reasoning and arguments from authority) actually produce a prose that is objective and disinterested in keeping with traditional ideals of science. The analysis shows that medical authors in fact use a variety of persuasive strategies in their articles (strategies which may be classified according to the classical canons of rhetoric), and that the writing in medical journals, is not simply objective and disinterested, although on initial reading, because of its impersonal style, it may appear to be so. The rhetorical analysis demonstrates that the use of textual features promoting an appearance of neutrality is itself a rhetorical strategy which argues for the acceptance of particular claims in scientific articles. The rhetorical analysis is significant for the theory and practice of science, for the discipline of rhetoric of science, and for the discipline of rhetoric itself. The analysis describes the complex rhetoric of scientific writing as a genre, probes the assumptions that underlie its conventions, and argues that scientific texts must be read critically, as rhetoric. To read scientific texts as rhetoric is to locate their arguments, scrutinize their forms, judge their authors, and evaluate their effects. The role of the rhetorician is to urge such reading, and everywhere to promote discussion of the ways of influence exerted especially by texts which appear at first not to be rhetorical. / Arts, Faculty of / English, Department of / Graduate

This study had two objectives: (1) to test the appropriateness of an existing instrument for attitude measurement with Oregon postsecondary writing teachers, and (2) to discover formative influences thus identified. Data were obtained by a questionnaire composed of the Scales for Measuring Teacher Attitudes toward Instruction in Written Composition (Schuessler et al., 1981), and additional original questions on training, demographics, and experience. The questionnaire was mailed to 122 composition teachers at 3 Oregon universities and 2 Oregon community colleges. Response rate was 80%. Additional information was provided by 6 respondents who participated in follow-up interviews. Factor analysis of scale item results neither replicated the attitude scales of previous research with this instrument nor produced meaningful new scales. The scales were thus judged inappropriate for attitude measurement with this sample. ANOVA did show associations between combined categories of independent variables (training, experience, and demographic traits) and attitude statements as dependent variables. Specifically, teacher characteristics of part-time employment, under 7 years experience, non Ph.D., and strong influence of a teaching assistantship were associated with prescriptive, content-centered attitude statement responses. The interviews suggested a need for refinement in attitude measurement devices to include items on teachers as writers, current teaching methodologies, and blending student- and content-centered instruction. In addition, the interview findings suggested patterns of influence on attitude for further study. Among these are institution of employment, status of employment, training, and teachers' own uses of writing.

No description available.

No description available.

This dissertation identifies if and how graduate teaching assistants and instructors working in the field of rhetoric and composition teach multimodal assignments in first-year composition (FYC) courses. The research questions for this study were as follows: 1) In what ways do graduate teaching assistants and faculty teach multimodal assignments in FYC courses? 2) Are graduate teaching assistants, adjuncts, and contract faculty equally as likely as assistant, associate, and full professors to teach multimodal assignments in FYC courses? 3) What kinds of training do graduate teaching assistants and faculty receive to prepare them to teach multimodal assignments in FYC courses? 4) Do graduate teaching assistants and faculty feel the kinds of training they receive adequately prepare them to teach multimodal assignments in FYC courses? If not, what needs to change? These research questions were investigated using a combination of online survey research methods and follow-up interviews. This study provides a broad and current analysis, as well as a reflective picture, of the teaching of multimodal assignments in FYC courses. As a result of quickly evolving technologies, instructors have potentially more opportunities to teach multimodal assignments. However, in some cases, writing program policies and curriculum limit or make it difficult for graduate teaching assistants and instructors to assign multimodal assignments in FYC courses. Thus, this study investigated the ways current graduate teaching assistants and/or instructors teach multimodal assignments despite difficulties and limitations. It also investigated whether or not graduate teaching assistants and instructors receive any training or help in shaping their multimodal pedagogy and whether or not they feel this training or help was adequate. The findings indicate instructors are more willing than their departments to implement multimodal composition pedagogy. The findings also show that instructors teach multimodal assignments in their classrooms in various ways, including the use of different technologies and resources. Evidence suggests that despite their desire for more help from their departments, instructors teach themselves how to use such technologies and resources to implement their multimodal composition pedagogy. The study concludes that how multimodal composition pedagogy is implemented in a writing classroom is more likely an individual instructor’s decision rather than a department’s decision. / Department of English

Typescript (photocopy) / Thesis (Ed. D.)--University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1979. / Bibliography: leaves 195-197. / x, 197 leaves, bound 29 cm

Cheung Wai-jee. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 152-159). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / ABSTRACT (English version) --- p.i / ABSTRACT (Chinese version) --- p.ii / ACKNOWLEGEMENTS --- p.iii / TABLE OF CONTENTS --- p.iv / LIST OF TABLES --- p.ix / LIST OF FIGUERS --- p.x / Chapter CHAPTER 1 - --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Overview --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- Background of process writing and pedagogical approaches to writing in Hong Kong --- p.1 / Chapter 1.3 --- A deficit? --- p.4 / Chapter 1.4 --- Rationale and significance of the study --- p.4 / Chapter 1.5 --- Overall objective of the study and research questions --- p.5 / Chapter 1.6 --- Organisation of the thesis --- p.6 / Chapter CHAPTER 2 - --- LITERATURE REVIEW --- p.9 / Chapter 2.1 --- Overview --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2 --- Review of ESL/EFL writing research --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2.1 --- Early ESL/ EFL writing research in NES context --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2.1.1 --- Audio-lingual method --- p.10 / Chapter 2.2.1.2 --- Controlled writing --- p.11 / Chapter 2.2.1.3 --- Guided writing --- p.11 / Chapter 2.2.1.4 --- Product-based approach --- p.12 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- A paradigm shift? --- p.13 / Chapter 2.2.3 --- The process writing movement and its implementation in ESL/EFL writing classrooms --- p.15 / Chapter 2.2.3.1 --- The process writing movement --- p.15 / Chapter 2.2.3.2 --- Process writing in ESL/EFL writing classrooms --- p.16 / Chapter 2.3 --- Current research trends in ESL/EFL writing research field --- p.18 / Chapter 2.3.1 --- The case-study research approach --- p.18 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- The social nature of writing --- p.20 / Chapter 2.3.3 --- Ethnographic research and composing processes --- p.20 / Chapter 2.4 --- How the development of ESL/EFL writing research influences the present study --- p.22 / Chapter 2.4.1 --- The social-interactive nature of writing --- p.22 / Chapter 2.4.2 --- A false dichotomy between product-and process-oriented research --- p.23 / Chapter 2.4.2.1 --- Continuous recursiveness of process toward a content- oriented perspective --- p.25 / Chapter 2.4.2.2 --- Learner-centered writing pedagogy --- p.26 / Chapter 2.5 --- Review of writing pedagogies in Hong Kong secondary school context --- p.27 / Chapter 2.5.1 --- Teaching writing in typical Hong Kong classrooms --- p.27 / Chapter 2.5.2 --- Implementation of process writing in Hong Kong context --- p.29 / Chapter 2.6 --- Research gaps --- p.31 / Chapter 2.6.1 --- The influence of students' self-perceptions of language proficiency on their writing abilities --- p.31 / Chapter 2.6.2 --- The influences of different writing contexts on students' composing processes --- p.33 / Chapter 2.7 --- Chapter summary --- p.35 / Chapter CHAPTER 3 - --- METHODOLOGY --- p.37 / Chapter 3.1 --- Overview --- p.37 / Chapter 3.1.1 --- Orientation --- p.37 / Chapter 3.1.2 --- Caveat --- p.37 / Chapter 3 2 --- Review of ethnographic research approach --- p.38 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Defining It as a descriptive research approach --- p.38 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Origins of ethnography in anthropology --- p.40 / Chapter 3.2.3 --- Evolution of educational ethnographic research --- p.41 / Chapter 3.2.4 --- The move to ethnographic approach in writing research --- p.43 / Chapter 3.2.5 --- Summary --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3 --- Overall research design of the study and research questions --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Research design of the present study --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Research questions --- p.46 / Chapter 3.4 --- Some design considerations of interpretive way of inquiry --- p.47 / Chapter 3.4.1 --- Cultural elements --- p.47 / Chapter 3.4.2 --- Naturalistic setting --- p.48 / Chapter 3.4.3 --- Role of the researcher --- p.49 / Chapter 3.4.4 --- Subjectivity versus objectivity --- p.50 / Chapter 3.5 --- Selection of subjects for the study --- p.51 / Chapter 3.5.1 --- Description of subjects --- p.51 / Chapter 3.5.2 --- Why these two student writers? --- p.53 / Chapter 3.6 --- Procedures of the study and data collection --- p.53 / Chapter 3.6.1 --- Procedures of the study --- p.53 / Chapter 3.6.2 --- Data collection --- p.55 / Chapter 3.6.3 --- Justifications of research instruments used in the study --- p.59 / Chapter 3.6.3.1 --- Questionnaire --- p.59 / Chapter 3.6.3.2 --- Semi-structured interviewing --- p.59 / Chapter 3.6.3.3 --- Journal keeping --- p.60 / Chapter 3.7 --- Data Analysis --- p.61 / Chapter CHAPTER 4 - --- DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDENT WRITERS: PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES --- p.62 / Chapter 4.1 --- Overview --- p.62 / Chapter 4.2 --- Agnes: Description of a high-investment student writer --- p.63 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Agnes's writing experience in her school --- p.63 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Agnes's perception regarding writing experience in school --- p.67 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- Agnes's perception regarding her writing ability --- p.68 / Chapter 4.2.4 --- Agnes's expectation regarding English writing --- p.73 / Chapter 4.3 --- Starberry: Description of a low-investment student writer --- p.75 / Chapter 4.3.1 --- Starberry's writing experience in her school --- p.75 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- Starberry's perception regarding writing experience in school --- p.82 / Chapter 4.3.3 --- Starberry's perception regarding her writing ability --- p.84 / Chapter 4.3.4 --- Starberry's expectation regarding English writing --- p.87 / Chapter 4.4 --- Chapter summary --- p.89 / Chapter CHAPTER 5- --- ANALYSIS OF THE STUDENT WRITERS' COMPOSING PROCESSES: THE STUDENTS' WRITTEN TEXTS --- p.90 / Chapter 5.1 --- Overview --- p.90 / Chapter 5.2 --- Description of the composing processes of Agnes --- p.91 / Chapter 5.2.1 --- Choosing the writing topic --- p.92 / Chapter 5.2.2 --- Searching for relevant materials and getting started to write --- p.95 / Chapter 5.2.3 --- Composing the essay --- p.98 / Chapter 5.2.4 --- Revising and evaluating the task --- p.101 / Chapter 5.3 --- Description of the composing processes of Starberry --- p.104 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Choosing the writing topic --- p.106 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Searching for relevant materials and getting started to write --- p.107 / Chapter 5.3.3 --- Composing the essay --- p.109 / Chapter 5.3.4 --- Revising and evaluating the task --- p.110 / Chapter 5.4 --- Chapter summary --- p.112 / Chapter CHAPTER 6 - --- ANALYSIS OF THE WRITING CONTEXTS AND THEIR INFLUENCES ON THE COMPOSING PROCESSES --- p.114 / Chapter 6.1 --- Overview --- p.114 / Chapter 6.2 --- Orientation of writing context and its relationship with composing processes --- p.115 / Chapter 6.3 --- A general description of the school writing context and its influences on students' composing processes --- p.116 / Chapter 6.3.1 --- Overview --- p.116 / Chapter 6.3.2 --- Institutional variables and concerns of teacher and student in a typical Hong Kong secondary writing classroom --- p.117 / Chapter 6.3.3 --- Individual perceptions of classroom environment on the composing processes --- p.120 / Chapter 6.3.4 --- A rush hour: Influence of time limit on the composing processes --- p.122 / Chapter 6.3.5 --- Approaches for writing in school --- p.124 / Chapter 6.3.6 --- Teacher intervention as a part of the writing environment --- p.125 / Chapter 6.4 --- A general description of the home writing context and its influences on students' composing processes --- p.129 / Chapter 6.4.1 --- Overview --- p.129 / Chapter 6.4.2 --- Individual perceptions of home environment on the composing processes --- p.130 / Chapter 6.4.3 --- A relaxing moment: Influence of time autonomy on the composing processes --- p.132 / Chapter 6.4.4 --- Approaches for writing at home --- p.134 / Chapter 6.4.5 --- Teacher-as-collaborator in the writing environment --- p.135 / Chapter 6.5 --- Students' interpretations of an ideal writing context --- p.137 / Chapter 6.6 --- Chapter summary --- p.138 / Chapter CHAPTER 7- --- CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS --- p.139 / Chapter 7.1 --- Summary of findings --- p.139 / Chapter 7.1.1 --- Product writing dominates the school writing context --- p.141 / Chapter 7.1.2 --- Teacher intervention in the composing processes --- p.143 / Chapter 7.1.3 --- Lack of process writing elements introduced --- p.146 / Chapter 7.2 --- Pedagogical implications --- p.147 / Chapter 7.2.1 --- Implications for student writers --- p.148 / Chapter 7.2.2 --- Implications for writing teachers --- p.148 / Chapter 7.3 --- Recommendations for further research --- p.150 / REFERENCES --- p.152 / APPENDICES --- p.160 / Appendix A. Overview of Native English Speaker (NES) Writing Research --- p.160 / Appendix B. Parental Informed Consent Letter --- p.171 / Appendix C. Teacher Consent Letter --- p.172 / "Appendix D. Communication Triangle: A Dynamic Relationship among Writer, Reader and Subject" --- p.173 / Appendix E. Aims and Purposes of Writing --- p.174 / Appendix F. Expressive Aim Writing: An Overview --- p.176 / Appendix G. Home Writing Task 1: Personal Experience --- p.186 / Appendix H. Home Writing Task 2: People --- p.188 / Appendix I. Review Sheets --- p.189 / Appendix J. Background Questionnaire --- p.193 / Appendix K. Pre-study Interview --- p.199 / Appendix L. Teacher Interview --- p.200 / Appendix M. Teacher Interview Questions --- p.201 / Appendix N. Academic-history Interview --- p.202 / Appendix O. Keeping a Writing Journal --- p.203 / Appendix P. Student Writing Portfolio (Content Sample) --- p.207 / Appendix Q. Two Students' Written Texts and Notes --- p.208 / Appendix R. Two Students' Journal Entries --- p.274 / Appendix S. Two Students' Retrospective Reports --- p.314 / Appendix T. Transcripts of Interviews --- p.320

This study investigated participation levels of developmental writing students inoral discussions and electronic discussions using the synchronous conferencing software InterChange. The study used a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods in a naturalistic/quasi-experimental design under a social constructivist epistemology. The methods included: word counts onto which biological sex and socially-constructed gender (as measured by the Bern Sex-Role Inventory) were overlaid as variables; a modified taxonomy based on Bales' Conversational Analysis measure; a taxonomy which measured the direction of discourse; and "thick description" in the form of subjective reactions to videotaped oral discussions and transcribed electronic discussions.The multi-modal, descriptive findings indicate that students participate more frequently in electronic discussions; that subsequent oral classes take on participatory characteristics of an InterChange session; and that while the more frequent participation in InterChange discussions does appear to carry over into subsequent oral discussions, socially constructed variables such as gender may, in fact, encourage students to participate less frequently in oral discussons after using InterChange. The findings also show that InterChange discussions are primarily student-centered: most of the responses generated are aimed at other students. In the oral classroom, very little student-to-student interaction occurs. The findings of this study indicate that while the computer environment may not promote egalitarian discourse, it does tend to produce more democratic discourse. / Department of English

The purpose of this study is to examine the development of writing in first grade children. It provides information about the changes that take place in the children's writing over an eight-month period. The writings of the entire classroom were collected; from these six children's writings were chosen for cross-sectional analysis. Two children from this group were further selected for in-depth case studies. Interviews, parent surveys, and observations were employed to monitor the children's writing development. The data are categorized according to (1) the child's general background, (2) the child as a writer, (3) the child's use of conventions of the writing and spelling systems, and (4) an overview of the child's construction of meaning. The subjects already had a rich, though varied, background of experience with writing when they entered first grade. Many invitations to write were given during the year, which resulted in three major types of writing: journals, notes, and stories. The children were eager to communicate in writing. They grew and developed during the year in a way similar to the way they once learned to speak, learning how to write through their interactions and experiences with others. They became aware of the needs of an audience, could determine the type of writing appropriate to a particular setting, used syntactic features that other writers use, and wrote to fulfill personal needs. As the children wrote, they discovered that certain conventions, such as spelling and punctuation, are used by writers to allow their message to be understood. The rate of development varied according to how critical these conventions were to the ability to communicate. The study demonstrated that children who have a message to communicate construct meaning as their first priority. As they use writing, they gain knowledge of the writing system and change occurs in their understanding of the syntactic, semantic and orthographic systems, allowing them to create more complex meanings for their readers.

This study is designed to analyze in depth, the behaviors that accompany the writing process in six third and fourth grade Native American children. The children's writing, collected over a two year period, was observed by a team of researchers who carefully recorded revisions, rereading, subvocalization, resource use, stop-and-thinks, interruptions, and related talk while writing was taking place in the regular classroom setting. Four groups of questions were posed as a result of the observations focusing around the kinds of resources young writers use, the way they revised, the role of oral language during composing, and the relationship among the various observed behaviors. Young writers use both human resources and a wide variety of inanimate resources such as dictionaries, bulletin boards, and other classroom print to assist themselves and each other in spelling words, and making various other decisions about their writing. The subjects have differing strategies for revising their texts, but have spelling and neatness as their highest priorities. Children use more resources more extensively when they are encouraged to, when the materials are accessible, and collaboration among classmates is promoted. Approximately 90% of all oral language that takes place as children write is related directly to their writing. Oral language is a part of and seems to be important to all phases of writing, including strategies for consideration of what to write, collaboration with others and finding an audience. The use of oral language demonstrates that all aspects of the composing process including pre-writing, text generation, and revision or reconsideration of text are dynamically interacting as writers compose. There are important co-occurrence of types of behaviors including stop-and-thinks with interruptions, revisions with subvocalization, and revisions with resource use.