Skip to main content

Inventing the University

  • Chapter
Writing on the Margins

Abstract

Every time a student sits down to write for us, he has to invent the university for the occasion — invent the university, that is, or a branch of it, like history or anthropology or economics or English. The student has to learn to speak our language, to speak as we do, to try on the peculiar ways of knowing, selecting, evaluating, reporting, concluding, and arguing that define the discourse of our community. Or perhaps I should say the various discourses of our community, since it is in the nature of a liberal arts education that a student, after the first year or two, must learn to try on a variety of voices and interpretive schemes — to write, for example, as a literary critic one day and as an experimental psychologist the next; to work within fields where the rules governing the presentation of examples or the development of an argument are both distinct and, even to a professional mysterious.

Education may well be, as of right, the instrument whereby every individual, in a society like our own, can gain access to any kind of discourse. But we well know that in its distribution, in what it permits and in what it prevents, it follows the well-trodden battle-lines of social conflict. Every educational system is a political means of maintaining or of modifying the appropriation of discourse, with the knowledge and the powers it carries with it.

— Foucault, T he D iscourse on L anguage

… the text is the form of the social relationships made visible, palpable, material.

— Bernstein, Codes, Modalities and the Process of Cultural Reproduction: A Model

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  • Aristotle. (1932). The Rhetoric of Aristotle (L. Cooper, Trans.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barthes, R. (1974). S/Z (R. Howard, Trans.). New York: Hill & Wang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomae, D. (1979). Teaching basic writing: An alternative to basic skills. Journal of Basic Writing, 2, 85–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartholomae, D. (1983). Writing assignments: Where writing begins. In P. Stock (Ed.), Forum (pp. 300–12). Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C, & Scardamalia, M. (1985). Cognitive coping strategies and the problem of “inert knowledge.” In S. S. Chipman, J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Research and open questions (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizzell, P. (1978). The ethos of academic discourse. College Composition and Communication, 29, 351–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bizzell, P. (1982a). Cognition, convention, and certainty: What we need to know about writing. Pre/text, 3, 213–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizzell, P. (1982b). College composition: Initiation into the academic discourse community. Curriculum Inquiry, 12, 191, 207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bizzell, P., & Herzberg, B. (1980). “Inherent” ideology, “universal” history, “empirical” evidence, and “context-free” writing: Some problems with E. D. Hirsch’s The Philosophy of Composition. Modern Language Notes, 95, 1181–1202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coles, W. E., Jr. (1978). 77K plural 1. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish, S. (1980). 7s there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L. S. (1981). Revising writer-based prose. Journal of Bask Writing, 3, 62–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hairston, M. (1978). A contemporary rhetoric. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunsford, A. A. (1980). The content of basic writers’ essays. College Composition and Communication, 31, 278–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maimon, E. P., Belcher, G. L., Hearn, G. W., Nodine, B. F., & O’Connor, F. X. (1981). Writing in the arts and sciences. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. R. (1981). Writing: The divorce of the author from the text. In B. M. Kroll & R. J. Vann (Eds.), Exploring speaking — writing relationships: Connections and contrasts. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D. N. (1985). General cognitive skills: Why not? In S. S. Chipman, J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Research and open questions (Vol. 2). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponsot, M., & Deen, R. (1982). Beat not the poor desk. Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodriquez, R. (1983) Hunger of Memory. New York: Bantam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose, M. (1983). Remedial writing courses: A critique and a proposal. College English, 45, 109–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Said, E. W. (1975) Beginnings: Intention and method. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaughnessy, M. (1977). Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Copyright information

© 2005 Bedford/St. Martin’s

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bartholomae, D. (2005). Inventing the University. In: Writing on the Margins. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4039-8439-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics