Fulkerson explains it all to me

Thank you, Richard Fulkerson, for letting me in on the secret of English composition. My undergrad degree is in Marketing, not English, and so an awful lot of what the readings, our teacher, and you wonderful classmates say doesn't really make sense to me. Lest you think me a dolt, I'll divulge that I did take a number of English classes in my 8 years at college, but I got to skip Freshman English because I had AP credits.

I have been in classes that seemed to have a Critical/Cultural Studies flavor (not all of them were English classes). I think the approach results in a thorough reading of the literature and provides opportunity to broaden one's view of the world and one's place in it. If the student is a fluent and sophisticated writer, it is pretty easy to do well in the class. Just as Fulkerson says, "we get a 'writing' course in which writing is required and evaluated, but not taught." And though it may be distasteful and inadvertent, there is definitely indoctrination going on.

I have also been in classes that took the Contemporary Expressivist path. These are easy for a student who is willing to engage in the process. After all, how can anyone judge how much personal development has happened as a result of the class? The student who writes with style will have no trouble helping the teacher see success.

Rhetorical approaches to composition are mostly new to me. I took the Beats class last semester, and was tantalized by the idea of developing an argument about literature, and then supporting it. But I didn't know how to go about that, having not been taught to do so. I mostly floundered around and tried a number of ways to make sense of my own ideas - not with much skill or smarts. I now see the necessity of considering one's audience - that would have helped me last semester.

I enjoyed Fulkerson's Conclusions and Implications, and agree with the ones I understand. I'm excited to learn more.