|
Articles Conference Reviews |
2008A15BirdCognitive Science and Scientific Research for Composition Studies Olivia Walling's presentation, “Writing in a Technological System: the Reality of 'Scientific' Research,” began with an argument against the view that writing is merely a technology. She noted that “knowledge is instantiated in text;” however, we seem to have a pervading assumption that knowledge is created outside of the text, and this assumption hurts our understanding of texts as being more than a technology. Texts exist in a system, just as technology exists in a system. Knowledge is achieved in the writing itself—shaped, defined by technology of writing. Walling then presents a few critiques of qualitative research, suggesting that quantitative research serves a very important and critical role in research on writing. Liberty Kohn's presentation, “Beyond Reason: How Students Use Emotion and Narrative Problem Solving for Context and Reading Strategy in Non-Narrative Texts,” explored the major role that emotion plays in our making of meaning. He argued that emotions are in fact not separate from reasoning but may even drive reasoning. However, our cognitive models do not account for this important role of emotion. He made four claims about emotion: 1) emotion enables us to relate concepts in unrelated fields; 2) feeling prompts us to take a stand on events; 3) feeling is self-implicating; 4) feeling is anticipatory, helping readers really enter into the reading process. He explained that feeling is anticipatory—it can change everything from semantics to schema and can be used as a frame for someone trying to make meaning when they don't have the background understanding, such as a basic writer. In a presentation titled, “Why Our Brain Needs to Be 'Wide as the Sky'” Connecting Learning Theory and Neural Studies,” the third speaker, Stephen Adkison, talked about some important connections between new neural science research on learning and our understanding of recursion. He began with reminding us how much our discipline has relied upon cognitive learning theory (Vygotsky, Bruner, Britton) and that we already understand that our social interaction is language based. We are by nature “questers”—our brains naturally seek to make meaning. He explains the work of Paul Grobstein on neural studies. Grobstein says that the process of learning is literally a process of building and maintaining neural networks. The very function of the brain is forming networks; the brain is an explorer, filling in gaps; the brain is a storyteller, filling in gaps. He says that learning from a neurological standpoint is really the brain finding ways to get it wrong less often. Learning, in other words, is all about making connections. Brian McNely's presentation was entitled: “Theorizing Recursion: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach.” McNely began with the proposition that recursion is so commonplace in rhetoric and composition studies that we really fail to see its importance. Though it was a topic of research for several years, early studies focused on recursion have been replaced by broad studies that simply include it within “the writing process.” He defined recursion as a process of repetition in a self-similar way, noting that we think recursively—we rely on past thought to help us make sense of new phenomena. He believes that, what he terms “recursive hermeneutics,” is one step on the way to knowledge formation. McNely asserted that recursion is the fuel of rhetorical invention; we create new ideas/patterns by relying on previous patterns; we recognize patterns and cobble together new patterns. The session ended with a lively discussion of the importance of these kinds of studies for our discipline, both in terms of theory and practice. This was an excellent session, with all presenters blending so well together, even though they had not known each other previously. A tribute to the convention programmers! |