Posts
What does Bartholomae mean when he says that students must “invent the university” when they write in college?
He means that the student who is writing the essay, story article, etc, needs to understand that he or she needs to write in different perspectives based on the subject the student is writing about. For example is a student is writing a paper on the revolutionary war. You can't talk about the war through the eyes of a anthropologist you need to talk about it through the eyes of a historian. In essence we need to write our papers as if we were the instructor of the subject.
What does Bartholomae suggest is a way for students to become “insiders” within academic discourse?
A good way that the student can become insiders within academic discourse is to start writing papers and doing assignments as if the student was already in the field that she or he has chosen instead of just do tests to see whether they have knowledge of the field or not.
Summarize some of the differences between the two examples of student writing that Bartholomae examines, and Bartholomae’s opinion of these examples.
Some of the differences of the example are that the first students essay is very short and uncomplicated. He doesn't use much vocabulary and it was later reveled that he copied what he had in his essay from Billy-White Shoes Johnson. The next essay that they use for an example the student uses much vocabulary and then she also contradicts herself a lot. She first tells herself as not being creative but using imitation and then she says that she was creative to a point because she was using her imagination.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your answer to question 1 points out an interesting issue. You write that "For example is a student is writing a paper on the revolutionary war. You can't talk about the war through the eyes of a anthropologist you need to talk about it through the eyes of a historian."
ReplyDeleteI think you're correct that each discipline has boundaries, and talking about the revolutionary war usually falls within the boundaries of historians. But I think that other disciplines can talk about the same topic, but they would have very different approaches, and would be asking different questions and using different methods to develop insight. So, a historian might object to an anthropologist doing history, but might not care if they look at the revolutionary war to ask questions that only an anthropologist would ask.