Tevis Tucker

Ms. Wolcott
ENC1101-0M10
11/11/2014
Discourse Community Assignment
Writing about Writing is a refreshing new perspective on writing. It presents and
analyzes the subject of writing like a biology textbook would present the subject of biology. It
delves far beyond the rudimentary rules of writing that we all have grown to despise. Staring at
a blank Word document or sheet of notebook paper but not knowing how to begin All of the
ideas are bouncing around in your head, but right now, all you can think about is what the
teacher wants you to write, and how they want you to write it. What smart-sounding synonyms
will you use, will you make that flow chart before you start writing, and most importantly, will
you organize your ideas into five paragraphs, roughly five to seven sentences each?
I understand that when introducing the concept of writing to children in grade school, it is
simple to give them a set of rules to follow. But these rules grow on the children as they
continue to develop as writers until eventually, they do more harm than good. Because of the
way writing is taught, children learn that a strong paper is one that is error-free. They are being
taught that error avoidance is the key to getting a good grade, and therefore mastering the skill of
writing. Teachers focus more on spelling and grammar than on the childs ideas and creativity.
Writing is a beautiful art form that allows us to communicate ideas to each other, but when the
only critique offered by the teachers infamous red ink are on misspelled words and punctuation
errors, that childs love for writing diminishes. The freedom of writing seems less free with

more and more restrictions set upon it. Writing becomes a chore instead of a hobby, and this all
boils down to our unhealthy fixation with these rules.
Writing about Writing is a textbook that shows students numerous studies conducted on
many aspects of writing, and then dares them to respond by writing and doing research of their
own. The textbook doesnt tell students how to write, but rather introduces them to research
done in the field so that they can decide for themselves about the way they want to write. This
text also has another, less direct, purpose. This text introduces students into the discourse
community of people who study about writing. I have no doubt that this text has all the keys to
introduce members into their community, but the system that precedes this text is flawed, as I
mentioned before. We spend too much time teaching children the wrong way to write, and
introduce better ways (as suggested by the book) far too late (in college). This text did a
wonderful job of assimilating me into the discourse community to the best of its abilities, but
without fixing the foundation of how we are taught writing, this community that is built upon it
will struggle to survive.
By the time students move on to middle school, content and quality, not quantity, of work
should be all that matters. Students should be rewarded on their imagination and attempts to be
unique, not their memorization of rules and adherence to mainstream ideologies. I firmly believe
that many of the concepts in Writing about Writing should be introduced at this age to help the
sustainability and success of this discourse community.
A discourse community is a group of people involved in and communicating about a
particular topic, issue, or field of study. Writing about Writing is a perfect embodiment of that.
John Swales, former professor of Linguistics and Director of the English Language Institute at
the University of Michigan, created six defining characteristics that he thought were necessary

for identifying any group of people as a discourse community. These six characteristics can all
be applied to proving this textbook, and the people that helped create it, does represent a
discourse community.
The first characteristic of Swales is that the discourse community has a broadly agreed
set of common public goals. In Writing about Writings Preface for Instructors, the first
paragraph clearly lays out the goals of the community and of the text itself. They mention how
they are trying to grow their community and create more successful college writers. They then
go on to list reasons why this text is a smart choice for composition classes in college. In
addition to those broad goals, before every chapter, they list chapter goals for what they believe
the reader should learn in those pages. This is clearly a community that has no shortage of goals.
The second of Swales characteristics is that the discourse community has mechanisms
of intercommunication among its members. This community has clear goals, so communicating
with one another to help achieve it is not much of an issue. Researching a field as complex as
the cognition of writing requires more than one researcher. Multiple researchers and research
teams across many disciplines are contributing to the underlying knowledge and further
expansion of the community. Within each new study, a copious amount of previous research
from the field is cited and discussed. Just the fact that this book has brought together all of these
findings into one central location invites for further conversation amongst members of the
community. Also, after each article/reading in the textbook, discussion questions are asked to
stimulate more and more discussion amongst the group members.
The third characteristic reads: A discourse community uses its participatory mechanisms
primarily to provide information and feedback. This is very true. All of the methods to invite
conversation within members are primarily to provide information and feedback. When one

researcher looks at a previous study and uses it with their research, they are doing so to expand
what is known about the topic; they are adding information. The book offers potential
assignments like this very paper that I am writing. The discussion questions are to kick-start a
conversation in a classroom setting and hear feedback from the newcomers in the community.
Number four on Swales list is that a discourse community utilizes and hence possesses
one or more genres in the communicative furtherance of its aims. A genre is a category of text.
The category of text the members of this community use is research. They use their research to
compare and contrast things and make assumptions about certain things in the community.
Considering that all of the more experienced members in the community have a PhD or higher,
any form of communication between one another is probably of the professional genre.
The fifth characteristic states that in addition to owning genres, a discourse community
has acquired some specific lexis. Lexis is certain vocabulary or terms used by a specific group
or field of study. Throughout the articles/readings, new terms (or their lexis) are bolded and
defined in the glossary. I can tell you that I definitely had to resort to the glossary to help me
with the new vocabulary.
The last characteristic is that a discourse community has a threshold level of members
with a suitable degree of relevant content and discoursal expertise. The threshold level for this
community, at this time, is a college level student. The level to achieve expertise requires a PhD
and research to contribute to the field. But to thrive as a discourse community, there needs to be
a reasonable ratio between new members and experts. Right now, this community is lacking
new members, which is why it is crucial to start recruiting and educating students at a younger
age, so they are more willing to join the discourse community.

As you can see, people who study writing and the text they created, Writing about
Writing, is definitely a discourse community because it passes all of Swales criteria. Now the
issue is how effective it is. As I said before, I strongly believe the concepts in this book need to
be taught to students earlier. For example, concepts from Anne Lamotts Shitty First Drafts
can be watered down (and censored) so that a middle schooler could understand. This will show
them that ideas are what matters and not structure. A perfect paper wont come from the first
draft, but that isnt what matters. Writing isnt just about the finished product, its about the
process.
Sondra Perls The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers can be a lesson
on how there isnt one correct approach to writing. Everyone has different methods, and there
is nothing wrong with that. Also, her findings on common editing mistakes can be taught to the
students so they can look out for them. Laura Carrolls "Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward
Rhetorical Analysis" could show students how we subconsciously rhetorically analyze (judge)
almost every aspect of our life, so when the students are asked to rhetorically analyze text, it is
not much different. James Paul Gees "Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction" can
show students that language is so much more than just grammar. Well-constructed words and
sentences are a small portion of the bigger picture: who is this person, what do they believe, what
are they doing as they are saying this, how are they saying this, why are they saying this, etc. "I
have a dream" -muttered by an opportunistic six year old- and "I have a dream" -defiantly stated
by Civil Rights Activist Martin Luther King Jr- have completely different meanings, although
their grammar may be the same. Context is everything. Gees commentary on primary
socialization, or the acquisition of our Primary Discourse, can show students that our families,
and the way we grow up, heavily impacts our view of the world. As children, we are fresh into

the world and easily influenced. This period is crucial into shaping the people we
become. Again, context is everything. We are unique as individuals, but we are shaped by the
people that surround us and share their core values. Gee goes on to say how secondary
discourses are acquired by apprenticeship in the community (like the community of people who
study writing). John Swales six criteria for a discourse community from his study "The Concept
of Discourse Community", that I mentioned above, could be watered down to simpler terms to
introduce the concept of discourse communities to them.
I could go on and on about how the basic core concept behind all of these studies could
help the students out. It isnt too complicated for them. What is complicated is when you are
taught how to write inefficiently for nine to ten years of your life, and then not until you get to
college are you introduced to all of this eye opening information. This books information is
golden, and it deserves to be shared and taught to more students, at a younger age.
Writing about Writing has taught me so much more than writing. This books
psychological approach to studying writing as a cognitive process has completely fascinated me.
I have had an interest in psychology for quite a while now, but after reading this book, it seems
that flame has been reignited. I am currently undeclared at the University of Central Florida, but
psychology is now a major I am seriously considering.
In addition to inspiring a major, this community has introduced me to articles that I can
apply directly to my job as a server in the restaurant industry. In Tony Mirabellis Learning to
Serve: The Language and Literacy of Food Service Workers, he discusses how the menu is the
line of connection between the customer and the waiter. I also think this same relationship (but
with a different genre) is true in a classroom setting as well. The textbook is the line of
connection between the students and the professor. The textbook, like the menu, includes some

unknown vocabulary that forces the students (or customers) to engage in conversation with the
more knowledgeable professor (or waiter). Based on the professor's response to certain
questions determines how well the students understand the material and how successful or
interested they may be in the class (or how willing the customer will be to order that food item,
leave a good tip, recommend the restaurant to a friend, etc.). Also, the concept of mush faking
(introduced by James Paul Gees study) is very applicable. Basically it is the concept of fake it
until you make it. Everyone has to go through a mush faking phase in almost every facet of
their life. When you start something new, you just have to learn through experience. So when
you are asked about or faced with something you dont know yet because you are new to the
situation, you just have to fake your way through it, and learn from it. When I first started out
serving, I had to mush fake, and when I first started this composition course, I had to mush fake.
Mush faking is just a stepping stone to becoming a master in a field.
With all of this being said, I think it is clear that this book has done a magnificent job of
assimilating me into its fascinating discourse community. I just think it is a shame that we are
withholding its information until adulthood. This book has the tools to inspire kids to become
great writers and to join this discourse community. But if we continue to ignore the youth, this
discourse community cannot grow and prosper as it should.

Works Cited
Carroll, Laura l. "Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward Rhetorical Analysis." Writing Spaces:
Readings on Writing. By Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. Vol. 1. West Lafayette,
IN: Parlor, 2010. Print.
Gee, James Paul. "Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction." Journal of Education. 1st
ed. Vol. 171. Boston U, 1989. 5-17. Print.
Lamott, Anne. "Shitty First Drafts." Bird by Bird. Some Instructions on Writing and Life. New
York: Anchor, 1994. 527-531. Print.
Mirabelli, Tony. Learning to Serve: The Language and Literacy of Food Service Workers.
What They Dont Learn in School. Ed. Jabari Mahiri. New York: Peter Lang, 2004. 143
62. Print.
Perl, Sondra. "The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers." Writing about Writing:
A College Reader. 2nd ed. N.p.: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2014. 615-39. Print.
Swales, John. "The Concept of Discourse Community." Writing about Writing: A College
Reader. Ed. Elizabeth Wardle. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 215-229. Print.