Clause |
Making Move?
(Y/N) |
Stances |
| Move 1, "Establish a Territory," Introduction 4 (*green = Stance Keywords) |
|
| 1 |
(Y) Topic generalization |
Non Argumentative |
For better or for worse, composition studies has become a fragmented discipline. |
| 2 |
(N) give background for C1 |
NonArgumentative: to present fact |
At the college level, the teaching of writing has challenged instructors to negotiate a wide scope of exigencies, such as diversity of student audiences, various proficiencies of academic literacy, and the quick evolution of the technologies students use for writing. |
| 3 |
(N) give background for C1 |
NonArgumentative: to present fact |
With 10¡V16 weeks of student contact hours, instructors choose to focus on a few of these issues, both in their teaching and in their research. |
| 4 |
(N) elaboration on the "fragmented discipline" in C1 |
NonArgumentative: to present fact |
Therefore, in composition studies, instructors move towards specializations. |
| 5 |
(N) elaboration on the "fragmented discipline" in C1 |
Tentative: to show some possibility |
With a focused knowledge in these sub-disciplines, instructors tend to excel at developing strategies that address specific aspects of their courses. |
| 6 |
(N) Indicate the drawback of maintaining "specializations" in C4 |
High Argumentative |
These specializations, however, can make it difficult for these instructors to see how the sub-disciplines from these various exigencies may overlap. |
| 7 |
(Y) Specific focus: dilemma "digital writing studies" and "second language writing" face |
Non Argumentative |
This description represents the current status of digital writing studies and second language (L2) writing. |
| 8 |
(N) elaborate on C7 |
HighArgumentative: to counter |
Although both fields are sub-disciplines of composition studies,
|
| 8.1 |
(N) elaborate on C7 |
NonArgumentative |
they have evolved from different disciplinary and epistemological traditions. |
| 9 |
(N) support C8.1 |
NonArgumentative |
In their own right, these fields have prospered; |
| 9.1 |
(N) support C9 |
NonArgumentative |
in addition to having their own journals, conferences, and listservs, these fields get recognition within mainstream composition venues. |
| 10 |
(N) support C9 |
High Argumentative: to proclaim |
Needless to say, extensive corpuses of scholarship have been generated for both fields. |
| 11 |
(N) support C10 |
Med Argumentative: to suggest higher possibility |
As a result, teacher-scholars can confidently answer such questions as: |
| 12 |
(N) elaborate on C11 |
Tentative: to pose Q |
How will incorporating networked writing activities into curricular design affect my students¡¦academic literacy development? |
| 13 |
(N) elaborate on C11 |
Tentative: to pose Q |
How do I assess my L2 writers¡¦texts? |
| 14 |
(N) support C7 |
High Argumentative: to counter |
But if instructors ask which computer-mediated writing technologies are most conducive for facilitating L2 writers academic literacy development,
|
| 14.1 |
(N) support C7 |
High Argumentative: to proclaim |
the available corpus of literature that addresses all aspects of this question decreases significantly. |
| 15 |
(N) support C7 |
Tentative: to show some possibility |
As with the teaching of L2 writers and the teaching of digital writing separately, a cross-disciplinary research project would probably be considered the province of the specialists. |
| 16 |
(N) support C7 |
Med Argumentative: to suggest higher possibility |
In other words, scholars in digital writing may say |
| 16.1 |
(N) support C7 |
Non Argumentative: to present fact |
this type of cross-disciplinary research is outside of their expertise, an argument echoed by L2 writing specialists. |
