Discussion Questions

1- What is the researchers’ main argument in this article?

2- In your opinion, what are some of the downfalls of Ramanathan and Atkinson’s article?

3- Voice is a complex concept, “well-nigh impossible” to define, multi-dimensional, situated, written, personal. It is tied to individualism according to Ramanathan and Atkinson and not tied to individualism as Matsuda argues.

A- What are some of the reasons each “party” gives?
B- Which side are you with and why?
C- Can you think of any other reasons for associating or dissociating voice from individualism?

4- What are the three characteristics that Bowden gives to the “authentic” view of written voice? What is the “origin” of each?

5- What kind(s) of voice do you believe in? Please explain why.

6- Since we have different L1’s in the classroom, what is the equivalent to “plagiarism” in your L1?

7- For me, “Being a critical reader I don’t think is a good idea” sheds light on the distinction to be made between critiquing and criticizing (judging). What does “criticality” mean to you both as a student and as a writing teacher?

8- It seems to me that plagiarism is looked at as a cultural construct throughout, what is a “frustrating” point that the researchers give in relation to plagiarism?

9- How can we, writing teachers, help our students become critical thinkers, develop analytical skills and be more aware of plagiarism?

10- How does Matsuda define voice? Do you agree with that? Why? Why not?

11- In relation to Hirvela and Belcher’s “voice pedagogy”, is voice teachable and learnable? If yes, can you think of any writing activities that would help in teaching and learning it? If not, what can we, writing teachers, do instead?

12- Is Ramanathan and Atkinson’s discussion of voice convincing to you as a student and a writing teacher? Why? Why not?