Every day in our composition classes we answer the questions, what does it mean to be an expert writer and how do writers become experts. The goals of our classes indicate what we think expertise in writing is, and the way we teach indicates how we think writers achieve expertise. I am sure that there are many possible answers to these questions about expertise in writing, but right now our profession is faced with two apparently opposing answers. Cognitive rhetoric, founded on information-processing theories of psychology, proposes a concept of composition that stresses general knowledge. Social rhetoric, based on social theories of knowledge, suggests a concept that stresses local knowledge. And this distinction is reflected in their different ideas of expertise in writing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Carter (1990) studied this question.