What do you think?
Rate this book
Teaching Argument in the Composition Course: Background Readings
Presenting essential insights and practical information for instructors teaching argument, Teaching Argument in the Composition Course contains readings within a range of perspectives, from Aristotle to the present day.
469 pages, Paperback
First published November 27, 2001
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
September 12, 2008
The section I needed to read was very informative.
Read
December 4, 2018Author’s Background
Timothy Barnett received his Ph.D in writing studies and literature from The Ohio State University and is currently working at Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL. as an associate professor at Northeastern Illinois University's English Department. He has taught over 20 different undergraduate and graduate classes in writing, literature, and gender/sexuality studies. Currently, Professor Barnett is building an interdisciplinary minor in professional writing and creating courses in grant writing, writing for graduate school, and other such writing endives. In addition to his teaching and programmatic work, he assists in leading NEIU's “University Without Walls” Program, a competency-based program, which assists students in translating their professional life and community experiences into college credit. He has won three faculty excellence awards (in research, teaching, and university service), published several scholarly works on language, education, and identity, and given a number of lectures to a wide variety of audiences, and serves as writing coach for organizations and executives interested in strengthening their professional and community development writing skills.
What does a 21st century argumentative writing pedagogy look like? What principles should contemporary argumentative writing pedagogy and practice have? How should writing teachers design argumentative writing courses, motivate student engagement and promote literacy practices? Teaching Argument in the Composition Course Background Readings may take up the aim of answers these questions but fails. However, Barnett does call for the sensitivity and care in understanding students and the many ways that students may find themselves positioned. Barnett presents argumentative writing instruction as a vibrant means for contributing to student learning and development as they challenge and reinforce arguments about the value of teaching argumentative pedagogy and what students learn in college.
Teaching Argument in the Composition Course Background Readings by Timothy Barnett is a collection of essays from a variety of scholars, which provides a range of perspectives from Aristotle, Chaim Perelman, Carl Rogers, and others on argumentation and pedagogy. These theorists are the ones most often cited by argument textbooks; however, this book is not a final word on how to teach argumentative composition. The selections in this book questions and reformulate the dominant ideas advocated by the theorists mentioned. “To teach students to argue knowledgeably, thoughtfully, and ethically is to equip them to participate effectively in the formal institutions of a large democracy as well as in smaller organizations, such as religious groups, school boards, or community action projects” (Barnett).
The essays in this volume indicate that argument is a comprehensive and challenging form of writing, and that teaching such writing might involve assisting students to develop a variety of abilities. From a teacher’s point-of-view, students should learn to evaluate their own reading, writing, and thinking processes and to question personal and cultural assumptions about simplistic binaries such as right/wrong and good/bad, which might consider how cultural differences affect argumentation. Such efforts in the classroom can reconnect argument to rhetoric situations (event, constraints, and audience) (Bentz). These rhetorical writings may assist students to understand that argumentation, at its most effective, is a process of working with others toward greater understanding, rather than a competitive game that one either “wins” or “loses” and that every argument, no matter how simple or polarized, is subject to multiple viewpoints and a variety of resolutions. Teaching Argument in the Composition Course: Background Readings supports a central tenet of argumentation theory: the importance of recognizing the influence of theories from the past while also questioning the cultural-historical, and individual assumptions that guide all theories of argumentation.
Sections
The book is divided into two main sections: “Major Theories of Argumentation” and “Teaching Argument.” In the first section, the author attempted to allow teachers to draw on the theoretical essays from the first section in an attempt to stimulate thought about general philosophies. I find that the “Teaching” section of the book will be able to adapt the powerful writing assignments in this section for a variety of student populations. Yet, the classic rhetoric based on the classical influences would not provide every answer to contemporary questions about rhetoric; however Barnett points out that what teachers and student may learn from the classic rhetorical questions is that “one point in which we have our very greatest advantage over the brute creation is that we hold conversations one with another, and can reproduce our though in word; therefore, we would not rightly admire this faculty, and deem it [one’s] duty to push [ones selves] to the utmost in this argumentative field … teaching students to argue effectively, ethically, and humanely – is often considered the highest form of language use”, which I must agree, is an appropriate way to extend the legacy of the classic argumentative essay into the 21st century” (Barnett 3-4). Aristotle confirms this as he defined rhetoric as the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion, which falls into three divisions: speaker, subject and person (s) addressed (Aristotle Barnett 4-10). It my opinion that the samples used in the book are excellent. To name a few, the following examples cover the Rogerian Argument and the assumption that out of a need to preserve the stability of one’s image, a person will refuse to consider alternatives that he feels are threatening and will go to great length to eliminate the threat; Toulmin’s philosophy of argument that is like an organism: a combination of a gross structure and a finer physiological one; and Perelman’s view of the rhetorical universal audience within a deeply contested debate. What I learned from closing section one is that it is important to add this qualification: “through the argumentation and race, class, gender, and culture, readings must be explored and a variety of cultural influences on argumentation must be collected; yet it must be remembered that it is impossible to fully represent the argumentative strategies of all groups and all contexts. I take that as it is best to explore and go with what you know!
Barnett’s second section illustrates the teaching of argumentative writing in English classes and across the curriculum. The essays in section two provide theoretically sound and applied models to assist teachers and students move past the win/lose paradigm and to engage in alternative forms of argumentation (Barnett). The sample essays, Barnett feels, addresses the special anxieties of English educators, who need to present argument as an intellectually demanding process.
Since we have all been influenced by a culture that treats argument as a simplistic contest concerned primarily with winners and losers, I, like other writing teachers, have found the teaching of argument may be one of the most challenging tasks. In critically looking at the way our students envision arguments is to visualize the presidential debates, which feature short, prepackaged responses to extremely complex questions. I feel that Barnett understands and explains the problems experienced by our students watching the Presidential debates since these debates typically emphasize form over substance and appeal to popular prejudice over in-depth engagement with ideas. Barnett indicated that these types of debates promote “arguments” as a contest that may be resolved through physical violence and appeals to the lowest cultural stereotypes (295). I agree that as a result of the way in which arguments might be imagined by students, they may see writing arguments as the chance to write attacks with little depth, balance, or insight. One way to motivate students is to begin with a controversial issue that students pick from a list generated by the class. [as a note—I have found it best not to use the word “debate”] In one class, I call on volunteers from each side to engage in a public Rogerian discussion which is organized according to Rogers’ own rules, which does not allow neither student to mention one’s own views until they have restated the other person’s to that person’s satisfaction. Thus, the first round would consist of student A stating an argument, student B restating that argument in summary form, and student A either agreeing that the summary is accurate or attempting to correct it. This continues until student A is happy with the summary; then student B gets a turn to state his or her own point of view (not to refuted A). Often the exercise breaks down into a traditional debate in which one person either tries to refute the other’s views or restates them in a way that will make them easier to attack. Emotional hot buttons may get pushed. A couple of conversation topics I have suggested are “Should foreign students have to pay the entire cost of their education?” or by citing some chilling statistics about how much time most women spend in the work force and how little most women are paid as most women are conned into thinking math and science are too difficult, which is one of the fastest ways to economic independence for women…then I make the challenge … ”the world is passing you by, while you are all out there spray-painting your hair purple and reading People magazine; what are going to do about it?”
“Teaching Argument in the English Class” is a collection of essays and assignments about the politics and practices of generating scholarship in rhetoric and composition. The contributors to this book, many of whom are current or past editors of the discipline's most prestigious scholarly journals, undoubtedly have their finger on the pulse of composition's most current scholarship and offer invaluable insight into the production and publication of original research. They discuss publishing articles and reviews, as well as book-length projects, including scholarly monographs, edited collections, and textbooks. They also address such topics as how composition research is valued in English departments, recent developments in electronic publishing, the work habits of successful academic writers, and the complications of mentoring graduate students in a publish-or-perish profession. It is my opinion, the book seems to have an inviting and helpful tone, which makes this an ideal textbook for research methodology and first-year writing courses.
Conclusion
Barnett has written an introduction to both parts of the book and headnotes for each selection. Barnett has also prepared a bibliography that should help readers extend one’s investigations into the literature and theory of argument. Others, who want a narrower or deeper understanding of argument, should consult many primary sources referred to throughout Ramage’s et al. book. The basic idea of this mid-level book compared to Barnett’s is to help teachers translate theory into pedagogy and to make informed choices about which textbooks about writing arguments in first-year composition class make the best sense for their courses. Researching what else is being presented to teachers of composition concerning the teaching of argumentative writing, Ramage, Calaway, Clary-Lemon, and Waggoner have provided Argument in Composition (2009) to address to all teachers who might want to incorporate argumentative writing in one’s course. This book was aimed at being somewhere between a textbook on the argument (Part II) and a theory of argument (Part I). Teachers who need a straight argument talk are advised to consult any of the numerous textbooks devoted to the subject of argumentative writing found in the back of each section.
Timothy Barnett received his Ph.D in writing studies and literature from The Ohio State University and is currently working at Northeastern Illinois University, Chicago, IL. as an associate professor at Northeastern Illinois University's English Department. He has taught over 20 different undergraduate and graduate classes in writing, literature, and gender/sexuality studies. Currently, Professor Barnett is building an interdisciplinary minor in professional writing and creating courses in grant writing, writing for graduate school, and other such writing endives. In addition to his teaching and programmatic work, he assists in leading NEIU's “University Without Walls” Program, a competency-based program, which assists students in translating their professional life and community experiences into college credit. He has won three faculty excellence awards (in research, teaching, and university service), published several scholarly works on language, education, and identity, and given a number of lectures to a wide variety of audiences, and serves as writing coach for organizations and executives interested in strengthening their professional and community development writing skills.
What does a 21st century argumentative writing pedagogy look like? What principles should contemporary argumentative writing pedagogy and practice have? How should writing teachers design argumentative writing courses, motivate student engagement and promote literacy practices? Teaching Argument in the Composition Course Background Readings may take up the aim of answers these questions but fails. However, Barnett does call for the sensitivity and care in understanding students and the many ways that students may find themselves positioned. Barnett presents argumentative writing instruction as a vibrant means for contributing to student learning and development as they challenge and reinforce arguments about the value of teaching argumentative pedagogy and what students learn in college.
Teaching Argument in the Composition Course Background Readings by Timothy Barnett is a collection of essays from a variety of scholars, which provides a range of perspectives from Aristotle, Chaim Perelman, Carl Rogers, and others on argumentation and pedagogy. These theorists are the ones most often cited by argument textbooks; however, this book is not a final word on how to teach argumentative composition. The selections in this book questions and reformulate the dominant ideas advocated by the theorists mentioned. “To teach students to argue knowledgeably, thoughtfully, and ethically is to equip them to participate effectively in the formal institutions of a large democracy as well as in smaller organizations, such as religious groups, school boards, or community action projects” (Barnett).
The essays in this volume indicate that argument is a comprehensive and challenging form of writing, and that teaching such writing might involve assisting students to develop a variety of abilities. From a teacher’s point-of-view, students should learn to evaluate their own reading, writing, and thinking processes and to question personal and cultural assumptions about simplistic binaries such as right/wrong and good/bad, which might consider how cultural differences affect argumentation. Such efforts in the classroom can reconnect argument to rhetoric situations (event, constraints, and audience) (Bentz). These rhetorical writings may assist students to understand that argumentation, at its most effective, is a process of working with others toward greater understanding, rather than a competitive game that one either “wins” or “loses” and that every argument, no matter how simple or polarized, is subject to multiple viewpoints and a variety of resolutions. Teaching Argument in the Composition Course: Background Readings supports a central tenet of argumentation theory: the importance of recognizing the influence of theories from the past while also questioning the cultural-historical, and individual assumptions that guide all theories of argumentation.
Sections
The book is divided into two main sections: “Major Theories of Argumentation” and “Teaching Argument.” In the first section, the author attempted to allow teachers to draw on the theoretical essays from the first section in an attempt to stimulate thought about general philosophies. I find that the “Teaching” section of the book will be able to adapt the powerful writing assignments in this section for a variety of student populations. Yet, the classic rhetoric based on the classical influences would not provide every answer to contemporary questions about rhetoric; however Barnett points out that what teachers and student may learn from the classic rhetorical questions is that “one point in which we have our very greatest advantage over the brute creation is that we hold conversations one with another, and can reproduce our though in word; therefore, we would not rightly admire this faculty, and deem it [one’s] duty to push [ones selves] to the utmost in this argumentative field … teaching students to argue effectively, ethically, and humanely – is often considered the highest form of language use”, which I must agree, is an appropriate way to extend the legacy of the classic argumentative essay into the 21st century” (Barnett 3-4). Aristotle confirms this as he defined rhetoric as the faculty of observing in any given case the available means of persuasion, which falls into three divisions: speaker, subject and person (s) addressed (Aristotle Barnett 4-10). It my opinion that the samples used in the book are excellent. To name a few, the following examples cover the Rogerian Argument and the assumption that out of a need to preserve the stability of one’s image, a person will refuse to consider alternatives that he feels are threatening and will go to great length to eliminate the threat; Toulmin’s philosophy of argument that is like an organism: a combination of a gross structure and a finer physiological one; and Perelman’s view of the rhetorical universal audience within a deeply contested debate. What I learned from closing section one is that it is important to add this qualification: “through the argumentation and race, class, gender, and culture, readings must be explored and a variety of cultural influences on argumentation must be collected; yet it must be remembered that it is impossible to fully represent the argumentative strategies of all groups and all contexts. I take that as it is best to explore and go with what you know!
Barnett’s second section illustrates the teaching of argumentative writing in English classes and across the curriculum. The essays in section two provide theoretically sound and applied models to assist teachers and students move past the win/lose paradigm and to engage in alternative forms of argumentation (Barnett). The sample essays, Barnett feels, addresses the special anxieties of English educators, who need to present argument as an intellectually demanding process.
Since we have all been influenced by a culture that treats argument as a simplistic contest concerned primarily with winners and losers, I, like other writing teachers, have found the teaching of argument may be one of the most challenging tasks. In critically looking at the way our students envision arguments is to visualize the presidential debates, which feature short, prepackaged responses to extremely complex questions. I feel that Barnett understands and explains the problems experienced by our students watching the Presidential debates since these debates typically emphasize form over substance and appeal to popular prejudice over in-depth engagement with ideas. Barnett indicated that these types of debates promote “arguments” as a contest that may be resolved through physical violence and appeals to the lowest cultural stereotypes (295). I agree that as a result of the way in which arguments might be imagined by students, they may see writing arguments as the chance to write attacks with little depth, balance, or insight. One way to motivate students is to begin with a controversial issue that students pick from a list generated by the class. [as a note—I have found it best not to use the word “debate”] In one class, I call on volunteers from each side to engage in a public Rogerian discussion which is organized according to Rogers’ own rules, which does not allow neither student to mention one’s own views until they have restated the other person’s to that person’s satisfaction. Thus, the first round would consist of student A stating an argument, student B restating that argument in summary form, and student A either agreeing that the summary is accurate or attempting to correct it. This continues until student A is happy with the summary; then student B gets a turn to state his or her own point of view (not to refuted A). Often the exercise breaks down into a traditional debate in which one person either tries to refute the other’s views or restates them in a way that will make them easier to attack. Emotional hot buttons may get pushed. A couple of conversation topics I have suggested are “Should foreign students have to pay the entire cost of their education?” or by citing some chilling statistics about how much time most women spend in the work force and how little most women are paid as most women are conned into thinking math and science are too difficult, which is one of the fastest ways to economic independence for women…then I make the challenge … ”the world is passing you by, while you are all out there spray-painting your hair purple and reading People magazine; what are going to do about it?”
“Teaching Argument in the English Class” is a collection of essays and assignments about the politics and practices of generating scholarship in rhetoric and composition. The contributors to this book, many of whom are current or past editors of the discipline's most prestigious scholarly journals, undoubtedly have their finger on the pulse of composition's most current scholarship and offer invaluable insight into the production and publication of original research. They discuss publishing articles and reviews, as well as book-length projects, including scholarly monographs, edited collections, and textbooks. They also address such topics as how composition research is valued in English departments, recent developments in electronic publishing, the work habits of successful academic writers, and the complications of mentoring graduate students in a publish-or-perish profession. It is my opinion, the book seems to have an inviting and helpful tone, which makes this an ideal textbook for research methodology and first-year writing courses.
Conclusion
Barnett has written an introduction to both parts of the book and headnotes for each selection. Barnett has also prepared a bibliography that should help readers extend one’s investigations into the literature and theory of argument. Others, who want a narrower or deeper understanding of argument, should consult many primary sources referred to throughout Ramage’s et al. book. The basic idea of this mid-level book compared to Barnett’s is to help teachers translate theory into pedagogy and to make informed choices about which textbooks about writing arguments in first-year composition class make the best sense for their courses. Researching what else is being presented to teachers of composition concerning the teaching of argumentative writing, Ramage, Calaway, Clary-Lemon, and Waggoner have provided Argument in Composition (2009) to address to all teachers who might want to incorporate argumentative writing in one’s course. This book was aimed at being somewhere between a textbook on the argument (Part II) and a theory of argument (Part I). Teachers who need a straight argument talk are advised to consult any of the numerous textbooks devoted to the subject of argumentative writing found in the back of each section.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews