Resistir regímenes de evaluación en el estudio del escribir Hacia un imaginario enriquecido
Publicado
abr 17, 2018
Almetrics
Dimensions
Google Scholar
Theresa Lillis
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7584-3772
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7584-3772
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Resumen
Este artículo se enfoca en el imaginario (Castoriadis, 1987) predominante en la investigación sobre el escribir y se pregunta, en particular, cómo los regímenes de evaluación ejercen orientaciones analíticas sobre este fenómeno. El artículo retoma algunos extractos de tres proyectos de investigación: uno sobre el escribir académico de los estudiantes (Lillis, 2001); otro sobre el escribir de los académicos para la publicación (Lillis y Curry, 2010) y un último sobre el escribir profesional de los asistentes sociales (Lillis, 2017).
Los objetivos del artículo son, primero, ilustrar el enfoque evaluativo-normativo sobre el escribir que se hace evidente en las prácticas de asunción en de los regímenes de evaluación, por parte del profesor, del evaluador y del inspector. En un segundo momento, argumentar que algunas categorías analíticas utilizadas a menudo en la investigación sobre el escribir pueden reflejar características de los regímenes de evaluación y llevar a un reconocimiento equivocado en lugar de iluminar lo que está pasando.
Por último, el artículo busca defender el valor de un enfoque de orientación etnográfico particularmente de un enfoque que resalta trayectorias de textos y personas⎯a la hora de ‘abrir’ los imaginarios de la investigación y de hacer visibles dimensiones clave de los fenómenos que estamos explorando.
Keywords
writing, normative orientation, ideology of correctness, ethnographyel acto de la escritura, orientación normativa, ideología de ‘uso correcto’, etnografíao ato de escrever, orientação normativa, ideologia de ‘corretitude’, etnografia
References
Angelil-Carter, S. (1998). Access to success. Literacy in academic texts. Cape Town: University of Cape Town press.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Barton, D. [1994] (2007). Literacy. an introduction to the ecology of written language. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical intro- duction. Cambridge University Press.
Blommaert, J. (2006). Ethnography as counter- hegemony: Remarks on epistemology and method, Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, 34, 1-8.
Bourdieu, P. (2000 [1977]). Pascalian meditataions. Stanford University Press.
Burgess, S. y Martín Martín, P. (2008). English as an additional language in research publication and communication. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Cameron, D. [1995] (2012). Verbal hygiene. Londres. Routledge.
Canagarajah, S. (2002). A geopolitic of academic writing. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Carlino, P. (2005). Escribir, leer y aprender en la uni- versidad. Una introducción a la alfabetización académica. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Castoriadis, C. (1987). The imaginary institution of society. Oxford: Polity Press.
Curry, M. J. y Lillis, T. (2013). A scholars’ guide to getting published in English. Critical choices and practical strategies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Delcambre, I. y Donahue, C. (2011). University lite- racies: French students at a disciplinary “thres- hold”? Journal of Academic Writing, 1(1), 13-28.
Fischer, A. (2015). “Hidden Features” and “Overt Instruction” in academic literacy practices: A case study in engineering. En T. Lillis, K. Har- rington, M. Lea y S. Mitchell (Eds.), Working with academic literacies: case studies towards transformative practice. [en línea]. Recuperado de http://wac.colostate.edu/books/lillis/
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York: Routledge.
Horner, B. (2016). Rewriting composition: Terms of exchange. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press. Hymes, D. [1973] (1996). Speech and language: On the origins and foundations of inequality among speakers. En D. Hymes (Ed.), Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality. Towards an understanding of voice (pp. 25-62). Abingdon: Taylor and Francis.
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kapp, R. (2012). Students’ negotiations of english and literacy in a time of social change. Journal of Advanced Composition, 32, 591-614.
Kell, C. (2010). Ethnographic studies and adult literacy policy in South Africa. En C. Cof- fin, T. Lillis y K. O’Halloran (Eds), Applied linguistics methods. A reader (pp. 216-233). Londres: Routledge.
Lather, P. (2010). Engaging science policy: From the side of the messy. Nueva York: Peter Lang. Lea, M. y Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.
Lillis, T. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation, desire. Londres: Routledge.
Lillis, T. (2008). Ethnography as method, methodology and ‘deep theorising’: Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written Communication, 25(3), 353-388.
Lillis, T. (2013). The sociolinguistics of writing. Edinburgh: EUP.
Lillis, T. (2017). Imagined, prescribed and actual text trajectories: The ‘problem’ with case notes in contemporary social work. Text and Talk, 37(4). Recuperado de https://linguistlist.org/ issues/28/28-3152.html
Lillis, T. y Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context. Londres: Routledge.
Lillis, T. y Curry, M. J. (2015). The politics of English, language and uptake: The case of international academic journal article reviews, AILA Review, 28, 127-150.
Lillis, T. y McKinney, C. (2013). The sociolinguis- tics of writing in a global context: Objects, lenses, consequences. Journal of Sociolinguis- tics, 17(4), 415-439.
Lillis, T, Harrington, K., Lea, M. y Mitchell, S. (2015). Working with academic literacies: Case studies towards transformative practice [en línea]. Recuperado de http://wac.colostate. edu/books/lillis/
Lu, M. Z. (1987). From silence to words: Writing as struggle. College English, 49, 437-448.
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rai, L., Lillis, T., Harrison, A. y Garcia-Maza, G. (2014). Effective case recording. En L. Rai (Ed.), Effective writing in social work. Making a difference (pp. 165-195). Bristol: Polity Press.
Rampton, B. (2010). Linguistic ethnography, interactional sociolinguistics and the study of identities. En C. Coffin, T. Lillis y K. O’Halloran (Eds.), Applied Linguistics Methods. A Reader (pp. 234-50). Londres: Routledge.
Russell, D. (1997). Rethinking genre in school and society: An activity theory analysis. Written Communication, 14, 4, 504-554.
Scott, M. (2017). Special Issue: Academic literacies. London Review of Education, 14,1. Recuperado de https://www.ucl-ioe-press.com/journals/ london-review-of-education/
Seargeant, P. y Swann, J. (2011). English in the world: History, diversity, change. Londres: Routledge.
Thesen, L. (2014). Risk as productive: Working with dilemmas in the writing of research. En L. Thesen y L. Cooper (Eds.), Risk in academic writing. Postgraduate students, their teachers and the making of knowledge (pp. 1-27). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Thesen, L. y Van Pletzen, E. (2006). Academic literacy and the languages of change. London: Continuum.
Trimbur, J. (2013). Grassroots literacy and the writ- ten record: Asbestos activism in South Africa. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 17,(4), 460-487.
Turner, J. (2011). Language in the academy. Cultural reflexivity and intercultural dynamics. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Barton, D. [1994] (2007). Literacy. an introduction to the ecology of written language. Oxford: Blackwell.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical intro- duction. Cambridge University Press.
Blommaert, J. (2006). Ethnography as counter- hegemony: Remarks on epistemology and method, Working Papers in Urban Language and Literacies, 34, 1-8.
Bourdieu, P. (2000 [1977]). Pascalian meditataions. Stanford University Press.
Burgess, S. y Martín Martín, P. (2008). English as an additional language in research publication and communication. Oxford: Peter Lang.
Cameron, D. [1995] (2012). Verbal hygiene. Londres. Routledge.
Canagarajah, S. (2002). A geopolitic of academic writing. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Carlino, P. (2005). Escribir, leer y aprender en la uni- versidad. Una introducción a la alfabetización académica. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Castoriadis, C. (1987). The imaginary institution of society. Oxford: Polity Press.
Curry, M. J. y Lillis, T. (2013). A scholars’ guide to getting published in English. Critical choices and practical strategies. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Delcambre, I. y Donahue, C. (2011). University lite- racies: French students at a disciplinary “thres- hold”? Journal of Academic Writing, 1(1), 13-28.
Fischer, A. (2015). “Hidden Features” and “Overt Instruction” in academic literacy practices: A case study in engineering. En T. Lillis, K. Har- rington, M. Lea y S. Mitchell (Eds.), Working with academic literacies: case studies towards transformative practice. [en línea]. Recuperado de http://wac.colostate.edu/books/lillis/
Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York: Routledge.
Horner, B. (2016). Rewriting composition: Terms of exchange. Carbondale: Southern Illinois Press. Hymes, D. [1973] (1996). Speech and language: On the origins and foundations of inequality among speakers. En D. Hymes (Ed.), Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality. Towards an understanding of voice (pp. 25-62). Abingdon: Taylor and Francis.
Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Ámsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kapp, R. (2012). Students’ negotiations of english and literacy in a time of social change. Journal of Advanced Composition, 32, 591-614.
Kell, C. (2010). Ethnographic studies and adult literacy policy in South Africa. En C. Cof- fin, T. Lillis y K. O’Halloran (Eds), Applied linguistics methods. A reader (pp. 216-233). Londres: Routledge.
Lather, P. (2010). Engaging science policy: From the side of the messy. Nueva York: Peter Lang. Lea, M. y Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 157-172.
Lillis, T. (2001). Student writing: Access, regulation, desire. Londres: Routledge.
Lillis, T. (2008). Ethnography as method, methodology and ‘deep theorising’: Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written Communication, 25(3), 353-388.
Lillis, T. (2013). The sociolinguistics of writing. Edinburgh: EUP.
Lillis, T. (2017). Imagined, prescribed and actual text trajectories: The ‘problem’ with case notes in contemporary social work. Text and Talk, 37(4). Recuperado de https://linguistlist.org/ issues/28/28-3152.html
Lillis, T. y Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context. Londres: Routledge.
Lillis, T. y Curry, M. J. (2015). The politics of English, language and uptake: The case of international academic journal article reviews, AILA Review, 28, 127-150.
Lillis, T. y McKinney, C. (2013). The sociolinguis- tics of writing in a global context: Objects, lenses, consequences. Journal of Sociolinguis- tics, 17(4), 415-439.
Lillis, T, Harrington, K., Lea, M. y Mitchell, S. (2015). Working with academic literacies: Case studies towards transformative practice [en línea]. Recuperado de http://wac.colostate. edu/books/lillis/
Lu, M. Z. (1987). From silence to words: Writing as struggle. College English, 49, 437-448.
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy, Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rai, L., Lillis, T., Harrison, A. y Garcia-Maza, G. (2014). Effective case recording. En L. Rai (Ed.), Effective writing in social work. Making a difference (pp. 165-195). Bristol: Polity Press.
Rampton, B. (2010). Linguistic ethnography, interactional sociolinguistics and the study of identities. En C. Coffin, T. Lillis y K. O’Halloran (Eds.), Applied Linguistics Methods. A Reader (pp. 234-50). Londres: Routledge.
Russell, D. (1997). Rethinking genre in school and society: An activity theory analysis. Written Communication, 14, 4, 504-554.
Scott, M. (2017). Special Issue: Academic literacies. London Review of Education, 14,1. Recuperado de https://www.ucl-ioe-press.com/journals/ london-review-of-education/
Seargeant, P. y Swann, J. (2011). English in the world: History, diversity, change. Londres: Routledge.
Thesen, L. (2014). Risk as productive: Working with dilemmas in the writing of research. En L. Thesen y L. Cooper (Eds.), Risk in academic writing. Postgraduate students, their teachers and the making of knowledge (pp. 1-27). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Thesen, L. y Van Pletzen, E. (2006). Academic literacy and the languages of change. London: Continuum.
Trimbur, J. (2013). Grassroots literacy and the writ- ten record: Asbestos activism in South Africa. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 17,(4), 460-487.
Turner, J. (2011). Language in the academy. Cultural reflexivity and intercultural dynamics. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Cómo citar
Lillis, T. (2018). Resistir regímenes de evaluación en el estudio del escribir: Hacia un imaginario enriquecido. Signo Y Pensamiento, 36(71), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.syp36-71.rree
Número
Sección
Dossier Writing Research Across Borders