A Blog on Using the Practical Intellect in Composition

Linda Daly

Dr. Donna M. Souder

English 501: Theories of Writing

01/27/10

A BLOG ON USING THE PRACTICAL INTELLECT IN COMPOSITION

All of us know that it takes dedication to become an effective writer.
Using Perelman’s ideas about effective composition, it is important to
identify a subject that the audience can relate too. An example could
be that students today must learn to write effectively to be successful
in the workplace. Most of these students will soon compete for positions
and promotions in the workplace, which among other things,utilize skills
in composition. Because of this need to write effectively, students today
are taught skills in writing. The highly impacted job market requires
even a greater sense of urgency about the importance of composition
writing in education.

At primary and secondary school districts today, the Six Traits of
Writing and Step Up to Writing principles are often used in the
development of a rubric used to assess a student’s composition. The
rubric categories are generally identified as follows:original ideas,
organization, voice, fluid sentences, word choice and grammar
conventions. Given that most of the current children in the K-12
grades of America are educated in schools utilizing a similar rubric for
their composition students, it might be assumed that today’s students
are better writers than those students who were educated in schools
not utilizing such a rubric.

However the principles of argumentation, which Perelman favors in
teaching composition, is not an argument for the truth of the matter,
utilizing the principles of logic. Instead he believes in the importance
of “practical argument and debate, in solving immediate problems and
formulating workable policies” in teaching composition (Hairston 67).
Therefore whether or not today’s CSAP test results show that such a
rubric has produced better writers than in the past is not the real
question at hand, as the focus is not on proving the truth of this
question. This is because Perelman’s focus in teaching composition
is not on “scientific and philosophical discourse,” or using tools of
deduction, induction and dialectic,” which “have been presumed to be
exercising speculative intellect,” (Hairston 66).

The crux of Perelman’s focus is on the ability of the student to
formulate a coherent argument in their compositions about practical
problems that Americans face everyday in society and in the workplace.
Furthermore, there is an expectation that the student’s argument
revolve around an actively effective debate regarding the pros and
cons regarding how to resolve such practical problems, based on
evidence that can be cited and evaluated. The argument needs to
address and engage the audience. The conclusion should include a
consensus regarding workable ideas that can be implemented as an
effective policy. Perelman believes that composition should use
“persuasive discourse and use (of) rhetorical tools of the enthymeme”
with examples taken from “experience or human observation,” which
presumably involve “using the practical intellect” (Hairston 66).

Given the premise of Perelman that composition should use the
practical intellect, I believe that the rubric for effective
composition needs to include the principles of argumentation. The
CSAP results alone do not identify a practical problem at hand. The
task at hand is to capture the ingenuity of the American people to
resolve identified problems in society and in the workplace in order
to achieve full employment. The state of full employment is the hoped
for evidence requiring evaluation and analysis by composition teachers
and policy makers today and tomorrow.



Bibliography

Hairston, Maxine C. “Bringing Aristotle’s Enthymeme into the
Composition Classroom.” Moss, Jean Dietz Ed. Rhetoric and Praxis:
The Contribution ofClassical Rhetoric to Practical Reasoning.
Washington, D. C.: The Catholic University of American Press. Print.

(Note year was not provided on the handout given to the class.)