The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Fragments of rationality: postmodernity and the subject of composition
Abstract
An assessment of the study and teaching of writing against the larger theoretical, political and technological upheavals of the past 30 years, Fragments of Rationality asks why composition studies has been less affected by postmodern theory than other humanities and social science disciplines. For Lester Faigley, the very conservativism of composition teaching - which has resisted the challenges of postmodern thought - makes it a revealing object of study. Composition at first seemed ready to accommodate postmodern ideas, but by the late 1980s, writing teachers were beginning to question many of the traditional presumptions underlying their approach to the task. This crisis in theory has come just as the tenacious back-to-basics movement, a heightened emphasis on education for economic productivity, cuts in funding for public education, and the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots in US society have forced teachers to consider the role of literacy instruction in reproducing social inequality. Drawing on the insights of Foucault, Lyotard and other postmodern analysts, Faigley addresses the theoretical debate about the self the student writer is asked to occupy, the modernist goal of producing a rational, coherent student subject, and the writing instructor's unconscious imposition of elite values and expectations in evaluating student work. He explores how networked computer technologies in writing classrooms are destabilising texts and subjects, and he asks what this loss of authority will mean for teachers of literacy. Faigley concludes by arguing that the electronically mediated culture in which we live has not brought an end to meaning, history, or subjectivity, but it does require thinking through the politics of location. In postmodern theory he finds ways of describing how subjects encounter boundaries in negotiating across competing discourses, and how awareness of those boundaries can be introduced into classroom practice.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A pedagogy of Multiliteracies Designing Social Futures
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (1996) · doi:10.4324/9780203979402-6 · Cited by 3,313
KERN, R. G. (1995) · The Modern Language Journal · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.1995.tb05445.x · Cited by 866
Plagiarisms, Authorships, and the Academic Death Penalty
Howard, R. M. (1995) · College English · doi:10.2307/378403 · Cited by 444
Rearticulating Writing Assessment for Teaching and Learning
HUOT, B. (2003) · Utah State University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctt46nx5z · Cited by 355
(2015) · doi:10.1057/9781137539724 · Cited by 344
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1993-06-01
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 30-5413-30-5413
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W284406555
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fragments of rationality: postmodernity and the subject of composition. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.30-5413
- The paper
- Fragments of rationality: postmodernity and the subject of composition. (1993). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.30-5413
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.