Answer/Quote: “At an
afternoon meeting of a professional writing group for K-12 teachers in our
local area, a group of teachers sat around a table sharing ideas and partial
drafts of articles for publication. Responding to a call for manuscripts, they
worked to develop drafts of articles that described promising slices of their
classroom practice or examined problematic teaching situations they had encountered.
The teachers around the table differed in terms of degrees held, years of
experience in teaching, prior experience with writing, and familiarity with
professional journals, yet they described some shared challenges in developing
heir articles.
Quote: “They wondered
aloud whether they had ‘enough’ evidence, referring to the anecdotes and artifacts
from their classrooms that they were analyzing in the drafts. Some worried that
they needed more citations or even statistics from some large-scale study in
order to make the observations they wished to make. They talked about the
appropriate register for addressing the readers of a journal, wondering if it
should be like speaking to colleagues in a faculty meeting or writing to a
professor in a graduate course. They sometimes wondered whether they might ‘get
in trouble’ with their building and district administrators if they expressed
criticisms of curricula in place in their school or, more subtly, if they
described teaching approaches that differed from the district curriculum
guide.” Pp. 390-391.
Comment: Pretty good example of how audience analysis
can be very complex. RayS.
Title: “Audience and
Authority in the Professional Writing of Teacher-Authors.” AE Whitney, C
Dawson, K Anderson, SK, EO Rios, N Olcese, and M Ridgeman. Research in the Teaching of English (May 2012), 390-419.