Dylan Nice's 5th Blog Post

While I find the concepts of CR and IR intriguing in theory, I agree with Casanave's assessment that they don't offer much (yet at least) in terms of concrete pedagogical insight or improved practices. What seems clear enough in the abstract, like that cultures write and communicate differently, becomes less clear, less certain, and less helpful in the specific. Instinctually, it makes sense to me that the individual is at least as powerful a force on writing style as the individual's home culture. I say that because when I think of my own writing, my style will vary wildly depending on the occasion and the audience. Thus, I was pleased with Casanave's assertion that audience expectations is a sound core principle to emphasis when teaching writing, especially ESL students who might be less familiar with the expectations of American professors and peers. I also was amused by Kaplan's use of the term "negative transfer" to denote instances when features of the writer's native language is expressed in English. I often find these to be "delightful transfers" which produce wonderful, fresh and unexpected phrases and bits of language. I would love to cite some specific "delightful transfers" I've encountered over the years of teaching ESL students, but since the blog is public, I'll refrain. But it seems to me that "transfer" from one culture to the next is what keeps language fluid and alive. Consider, for instance, the now ubiquitous phrase "my bad." The term is a transfer from AAVE. I read an article which traced its origins to pick-up basketball games in the 1980s in Philadelphia. These games where highly competitive, but had no referees, so it was up to the players to self-police to ensure a fair game. They adopted the phrase "my bad" to acknowledge when they had committed a foul. Obviously, the players found use for the phrase off the basketball court and it spread through the culture until becoming a permanent fixture in conversational discourse (and sometimes even academic discourse!) This was my second viewing of Writing Across Boarders, but the first time I watched it was without the compliment of the Casanave chapter. With the benefit of the Casnave piece, I was able to better understand that the cultural difference noted by the students, while valid, aren't universal. Therefore, the suggestion made later of talking directly to each ESL student about their education in writing seems an especially useful one. As does the explanation why grading down for ESL student's errors might be "equal" treatment but not "fair" treatment. And while the IR and CR waters remain murky for me, I think there's a lot of value in engaging with the ideas even if you ultimately find some of them lacking.