- Haas opens up with the statement “At the college level, to become literate is in many ways to learn the patterns of knowing about, and behaving toward, texts within a disciplinary field” (Haas 43). When she says this she is explaining that in order to understand scientific literature you have to realize that it has a purpose and context. For example when she says “in fact discourse theorists and scientific educators agree that students would benefit from a more rhetorical model” (Haas 46). When she says this she is giving evidence that scientific discourse has a purposeful and situational reasoning behind the information.
- When she says that autonomy in text is a myth she is saying that the text does not act independently. I agree with her statement in the sense that scientific text has connections to other texts and studies. This is supported by when she says “the belief of autonomous texts views written academic texts as discrete, highly explicit, even “timeless” entities functioning without contextual support from author, reader or culture” (Haas 45). When she says this she is backing up the idea that many students feel that scientific texts moves without ties to other work. However, scientific work always acts with other text or research.
- Haas’ study allows us to see how a students understanding of an academic discourse changes throughout their academic career. Their level of comprehension as well as, perspective of literature within their major changes. For instance when she says “we begin to see important changes in Eliza’s view of discourse: She exhibited a growing cognizance of texts(and the science they report) as the result of human agency(Haas 69). This is an example of how Eliza’s growth in understanding of discourse is apparent.
- Haas’ idea of rhetorical framework is the concept which helps readers have a sense of context when reading. For example when Haas says “when readers approach a discourse situation, they presumably have some knowledge or representation of the participants, including the identity, knowledge, and background of author and intended readers” (Haas 48). When she says this she is suggesting that before you read the text you should know why it relates to what you are studying.
- Haas’ concept of rhetorical reading shares similarities with Gee’s study of discourse. For instance Gee states “such metaknowledge can make “maladapted” students smarter than “adapted” ones” (Gee 13). When Gee uses the term “metaknowledge” he is referring to the concept of having knowledge of discourse prior to entering one. This is similar to Haas says ““when readers approach a discourse situation, they presumably have some knowledge or representation of the participants, including the identity, knowledge, and background of author and intended readers” (Haas 48). Both of these refer to having an idea of what you will be engaging in prior to actually engaging which allows you to better comprehend the information.
ENG110I
