SQR #3

Summary:

Where to Begin
Bartholomea starts of this article with the section titled “where to begin”. Bartholomae begins his article with the subtitle where to begin in order to show the readers what he wants to introduce, bartholomea uses a basic standard introducion to explain his purpose for writing the article Writing with teachers. Bartholomea uses “academic writing” as a key focal point to his reason for writing this article. Bartholomea states here, “ academic writing is a single thing only in convenient arguments”. Bartholomea explains that there are different areas which different types of academic writing is displayed. Magazine writing, business writing, political writing, and sports writing are examples of places Bartholomea states different types of academic writing are integrated.

My position I think
In “My position I think” Bartholomea starts off by stating his point . He says that “academic writing” is a very vital term in writing, and writing practices. Bartholomea says that a person can’t just write how they want, they must be taught how to make it “writing”.
Barthalomea defends his view on academic writing. He does this by using examples to defend his perspective to try to get the reader to understand his point of view over why academic reading is so important. Bartholomea tried to explain why he believes what he believes to the people at the convention who have criticised him.

The Contact Zone
In the section “The Contact Zone”Bartholomea talks about power, transmission and authority. As an investigation he says there is no better way to go about this investigation, but to ask “students to do as academics do”.

Teachers As Writters
Bartholomea admits that academic discourse does exist. He says that acacademic discourse writing is not real writing but a “blurred genre not free writing”. Bartholomea desputes that assuming that one genre is more real than others. Bartholomea uses an example to explain what he categorizes to be “blurred genre”. Bartholomea writes an example using real life senerio. Bartholomeo provides an image for the readers that states that people write in in their own words and say everything they want to say which Bartholomea considers the structure to be called “blurred genre”. Then a well-recognized writer re wrote it. Lets say this author made it all fancy and stuff and makes it a narrative genre. It is difficult or maybe even impossible to state which genre is more real than the other.

A Brief History
Bartholomea says that the topic of writing freely, or writing like we would like, is what brings up some conflict. Not necessarily fighting, but arguments debating as to which writing , academic writing, or academic discourse writing is the real way of writing.

Conclusion, or, So how do I get out of this
Bartholomea concludes the article by asking some questions in the debate on academic writing. He asks if al students should be required to say what they want to say in order to make sense of reality. Bartholomea does not have an answer to that. He states that we students cannot simply learn to write appropriately on our own, but need teacher guidance. He believes that teachers should teach students how to write “…as though they could be free, smart, elegant, independent, the owners of all that they say.”

Question:
What if students were told to always write academically? Would we all be stating ideas in the same fashion? Doesn’t that in a way defeat the purpose of writing?

Answer:
In my eyes if we were all told to always write academically we would be little writing robots. It just wouldn’t be right. It would take our voice away from our writing and it would not make it ours. I believe that if we all speak or write differently it is proper because thats what makes every single persons writing different, or unique. As far as whether it defeats the purpose of writing, I do believe so because as I stated earlier writing is suppose to be “unique”.