Jacob Babb’s America is Facing a Literacy Crisis address the belief (i.e. “Why Johnny Can’t Write” Newsweek article, also referenced in Branson’s First-Year Composition Prepares Students for Academic Writing) that modern Americans are being failed by the education system and are accordingly becoming both ignorant of and resistant to traditional expectations/rules around literacy and composition. He explains that this concern about declining literacy has existed since the opportunity for education became widespread, and continues to resurge whenever the teaching of composition changes to accommodate new media and compositional forms. He posits that this claim that literacy is on the decline is, in fact, an attempt by entities (people/communities/institutions) who possess the predominate literacy to control and limit emerging literacies. He says, “the concept of literacy continues to become more complex as we expect people to know how to produce and understand texts in multiple forms” (16), and points to composition coursework as an opportunity to foster students’ ability to engage in community and discourse through multiple literacies, not just not the institutionally and traditionally predominant literacy of reading and writing.

His refutation of the perceived literacy crisis is closely linked to the arguments being made in our other readings by Brayson and Wardle, as they are essentially all addressing what they see as an imperative to de-centralize teaching composition as a practice which has a prescribed and universal form. They are all attempting to look at teaching composition in terms of multiplicity—multiplicity of both academic and communal purposes (Brayson), of audiences and intentions (Wardle), and of literacies (Babb).

Likewise, Michael Theune’s Excellent Academic Writing Must Be Serious also challenges traditionally predominant forms of composition instruction. He specifically talks about the styles and modes of of composition which are taught and advocates for the use of humorous writing in what has been a historically formalized environment: the classroom. He details the various benefits of humor writing: it engages students in more descriptive writing; it invites students to look at texts/composition in new ways; comedic writing is often collaborative; and it can create a fresh or different interest in the writing process. He cites WWU’s own Bruce Goebel, who says that “’[H]umor is nothing less than the careful and effective use of language,’” (182) and as such posits that comedic writing can be intrinsically more attentive to the writing and reading processes.

Between all of these writers there emerges an underlying belief that diversifying students’ experiences in composition prepares them to both recognize the nuances in discourse as they read/observe/engage in it, and to become writers who are able to make deliberate and effective choices that suit the specific literacies and communities they’re trying to engage in.