0 Ann Raimes's remarkably readable article (Vol. 25, No. 3,) covers quite comprehensively the history of L2 approaches to teaching writing, including the methods of instruction and research tradition influenced by each approach. Although she uses the motif of a fairy tale journey through the woods by L2 scholars in search of new approaches, she judiciously refrains from championing any single approach in order to avoid taking false trails. Rather than indicate any alternatives or correctives for the future, Raimes simply notes the plurality of approaches, designs, and procedures (p. 421) characterizing contemporary composition classrooms and outlines shared recognitions on the diversity and complexity of teaching and learning writing that have emerged out of the search-which, she takes care to warn, indicate we are now rather than ... where we are going (p. 421). Although Raimes' treatment of the subject is prudent and controlled, this very stance eventually contributes to our dissatisfaction. Additionally, we are disappointed because her stance seems to derive from a lack of confidence or insight to make definite theoretical and pedagogical commitments; her sounds too easily achieved and not based on sound principles; she fails to provide a sustained angle or perspective to her account; teachers are not offered specific implications for classroom practice deriving from the search. What does pluralism amount to for Raimes? We are left with the
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suresh Canagarajah (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: