The proposition: as a teaching community — as a shared inquiry — we consider this possibility: that we can no longer advocate for, defend, or assume that the traditional, conventional academic essay is necessarily more “rigorous” than newer, emerging literacy practices. If proponents of multimodal composing practices are obligated to defend their pedagogical aspirations and rhetorical claims, shouldn’t proponents of the traditional, conventional academic essay be willing to do the same?
Such a process could lead to productive and generative insights into why we teach the traditional, conventional academic essay, and whose interests are served.
To be “rigorous” now includes the need to be self-aware about these choices and why we make them.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to be able to say, down the road a bit, that in First Year Writing at DePaul, we explored the claims, possibilities, and challenges of multimodal composing and, as a result, we came away with new understandings of the academic essay; that we have new insights into the contemporary academic essay, why we teach it, and what it should look like?
From the FYW Autumn Faculty Meeting
- The set-up: claims
- The context: criticisms
- The question: what should the academic essays look like? What should they do?