Identifying Writerly Moves

Kevin (Kyoo Sang) Jo

Professor Ellen Quandahl

RWS 602 Weekly Paper 1

January 28, 2014

Identifying Writerly Moves: coming to terms, forwarding and countering

Taking a look at “Toward Graduate-Level Writing Instruction” by Micciche and Carr according to the Harris’ writerly moves, I found those moves mainly in the first two sections. The first section says what the author talks about in the article, and it seems like the introduction section. In the middle of the first section, the author introduces Kathleen Yancey’s argument as follows: “In her call for developing undergraduate composition majors, Kathleen Yancey argues that writing should be extended both horizontally and vertically throughout the curriculum, filling the ‘glaringly empty spot between first-year composition and graduate education’” (480). This can be regarded as a coming to terms because the author agrees with it and uses it as a ground of her claim without any other discussion. Subsequently, the author quotes Harris’ opinion by stating that “Critical writing here denotes writing that takes as its point of departure other people’s writing” (480). The author emphasizes on building on others’ ideas about critical writing and maintains that critical writing pedagogy make room for wonder, the opening of oneself to new questions. This is a kind of forwarding because the author extends her discussion to critical writing pedagogy from Harris’ viewpoint on critical writing.

In the second section, the author introduces a history of graduate writing instruction. After explaining a pragmatic feature of graduate writing instruction history, the author mentions Patricia Sullivan’s 1991 essay which revealed the esoteric quality of graduate writing instruction. She argued in her essay that English graduate program had a systemic problem because it did not prepare critical writers for the profession. The author only pays attention to Patricia Sullivan’s arguments without developing her thought or providing other opinion. Therefore, this would be a coming to terms. The author also reviews previous research since 1991. That is about writing instruction for ESL graduate student writers, their instructors, and English graduate students writing a thesis or dissertation. Through the literature review, the author points out a gap by stating that “How students get to this endpoint and the extent to which specialized writing practices characteristic of advanced graduate study are part of content knowledge in English graduate programs is largely barren territory” (485). In other words, the author indicates the limits of previous research and identifies research territory undefined or unexamined. In such a respect, this would be a kind of countering.