English studies has become a "contact zone" of epic proportions, says Bruce McComiskey. Until the actual curriculum changes, English studies will remain mired in colonializing discourses, he says. The goal of the new English studies is to prepare students for a full and meaningful existence.
English studies has become a "contact zone" of epic proportions, says Bruce McComiskey. Until the actual curriculum changes, English studies will remain mired in colonializing discourses, he says. The goal of the new English studies is to prepare students for a full and meaningful existence.
English studies has become a "contact zone" of epic proportions, says Bruce McComiskey. Until the actual curriculum changes, English studies will remain mired in colonializing discourses, he says. The goal of the new English studies is to prepare students for a full and meaningful existence.
From McComisky, Bruce. English Studies: An Introduction to the Discipline(s). Ed.
Bruce McComiskey. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English, 2006.
1-65
The dual processes of specialization and expansion have transformed English studies into a contact zone of epic proportions. A contact zone is a space of conflict in which different groups come into contact, usually under conditions of inequality and coercion (Pratt, Arts 34). For over a century now, English departments have been a space of conflict within which ideological and material struggles among the disciplines comprised by English studies curriculum has been the most contested space within the administrative structure of English departments. We may speak all we want about fusion and integration, but until the actual curriculum changesuntil the path through which English studies students pass is made representative of the discipline as a wholeEnglish studies will remain mired in colonializing discourses that suppress and marginalize crucial enterprises. How can this new definition of English studies translate into curriculum? This is a question that must not be overlooked for some very important reasons. Graff highlights the politics of curriculum design: *T+he curriculum is the major form of representation through which academic departments identify themselves to the world (or fail to do so) (Is There 12). And Kress points out the ethics of curriculum: A curriculum is a design for a future social subject, and via that envisioned subject a design for a future society. That is, the curriculum puts forward knowledges, skills, meanings, values in the present which will be telling in the lives of those who experience the curriculum, ten or twenty years later. Forms of pedagogy experienced by children now in school suggest to them forms of social relations which they are encouraged to adopt, adapt, modify and treat as models. The curriculum, and its associated pedagogy, puts forward a set of cultural, linguistic and social resources which students have available as resources for their own transformation, in relation to which (among others) students constantly construct, reconstruct and transform their subjectivity. (Representational 16) If it is the goal of the new English studies to prepare students for a full and meaningful existence both inside and outside of the classroom, and if we envision a world where literature is one of many kinds of texts with which our students will have to contend, then some curriculum reform is necessary, and I believe that integration is the best model for that reform. (45-46)