Comments on Tony Silva's "On the Ethical Treatment of ESL Writers": A Defense of Using Themes and Topics to Teach ESL/EFL Writing

Abstract

* Is it appropriate, even ethical, for ESL/EFL writing teachers to focus on important, comprehensive course themes like peace education, environmental concerns, conflict resolution, literature, or critical thinking in their writing classes? According to Tony Silva in his thoughtful, controversial article (Vol. 31, No. 2, Summer 1997), the answer should be no. However, I believe it should be yes. Silva argues that ESL writers need to be respected by their ESL writing teachers in four important ways. Students should be (a) understood as student writers, (b) provided suitable learning contexts, (c) provided appropriate instruction, and (d) evaluated fairly. At first glance, it would seem that disagreeing with any of his four points would probably be tantamount to arguing against the value of cold beer in August. Of course, I agree with much of what he writes. I respectfully disagree, however, with most of what he argues for under the rubric of his third point, that ESL writers should be provided with appropriate instruction. The issue here is how to interpret the term appropriate instruction. In my view, his interpretation is too narrow and biased to be helpful. According to Silva, ethical ESL writing teachers should avoid using class time as an opportunity to teach other subjects unrelated to writing. He calls writing courses with comprehensive themes like peace education bait-and-switch scams that may present students enrolled in an ESL writing course with interesting and important yet inappropriate (p. 361) that may control or become the curriculum. He directs his criticism at a wide variety of popular comprehensive themes for writing courses, such as peace education, conflict resolution, environmental concerns, literature, critical thinking, cultural studies, and so on. In his view, teachers should focus the content of their ESL writing courses primarily if not exclusively on teaching writing, particularly on what he calls rhetorical, linguistic, conventional, and strategic issues (p. 361). As for selecting specific topics about which to write, he asserts that students should have the freedom to choose their own, either individually or in groups: It seems to me most reasonable and motivat-