Response to 4/28 Readings

The Adult Literacy Process as Cultural Action for Freedom
Paulo Freire


Although Freire wrote his landmark article in a very different environment from both us and many of the authors who build on his writings, much of his advice and observations remain relevant. One aspect of this article in particular attracted my attention, in which Friere discusses methods of using culturally pertinent prompts in regards to writing. I feel that this is a wonderful way of getting students interested in what they are writing, and if my experience in the writing center is any indication, that is a tough task.

“Only someone with a mechanistic mentality, which Marx would call “grossly materialistic,” could reduce adult literacy learning to a purely technical action. Such a naïve approach would be incapable of perceiving that technique itself as an instrument of mean in their orientation in the world is not neutral.” (Freire 617) This profound statement can be applied to other areas of learning across the board, and even reminds me of the article we read that chastised those who refer to computers merely as “tools”, and not instruments of learning.

Rhetoric and Ideology in the Writing Class
James Berlin

Berlin points out an aspect of rhetoric and composition instruction that many other authors have noted “any examination of a rhetoric must first consider the ways its very discursive structure can be read so as to favor one version of economic, social and political arrangements over other versions […]A rhetoric can never be innocent, can never be a disinterested arbiter of the ideological claims of other because it is always already serving certain ideological claims.” (717-718)

It follows then, that no professor can be completely impartial, a fact that I’m sure we can all attest to. The question then, is what type of rhetoric to use? Berlin discusses three types of rhetoric: cognitive psychology, expressionism and social-epistemic. Of the three, I think a hybrid of expressionism and social-epistemic would be the best approach, as they both acknowledge biases, and provide strategies for overcoming them.