![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Abstract
James Moffett is revered by many for his contributions to English education, but his interest in discourse and rhetoric led him beyond reform in the language arts curriculum to a vision of a radically reconceived approach to education, one in which disciplinary knowledge is subordinate to the processes of symbolic representation that creates that knowledge. This article traces the emergence of this proposal in Moffett's discussions of theory and pedagogy, and draws links between his ideas and the focus on language‐as‐social‐action that came to dominate North American writing studies in the 1980s.
Notes
1. Of Christensen, Moffett says this: ‘His analysis is indeed rhetorically oriented, since he emphasizes how syntactic differences make a stylistic difference, but students doing his exercises are not placed in a rhetorical situation. Unfortunately, the yoking of generative and rhetoric [in Christensen's title] suggests a utility for composition that is not borne out’ (Moffett Citation1968a, 174–5).
2. Moffett and Burke shared a fascination with drama. Moffett (1968a, 116) writes that ‘[d]rama is the perfect place to begin the study of rhetoric’.
3. In the UK, Doughty, Pearce, and Thornton (Citation1971, Citation1972) also created companion volumes that offered a detailed, theory‐based practice; and like Moffett's work, their theory and curriculum seems remarkably fresh and innovative today.