"I'M THE AUTHOR OF THIS PAPER": COLLABORATION AND THE CONSTRUCT OF AUTHORSHIP IN A FIRST-YEAR ENGLISH COURSE

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by SANS

The paper develops a theoretical framework for effective collaboration in a first-year English composition classroom, arguing that collaboration can improve freshman writing only when its conventions are explicitly taught rather than merely assigned. It examines authorship as a culturally constructed concept, tracing how historical shifts reframed writing from communal practice to personal intellectual property. Drawing on thinkers such as Vygotsky, Bruffee, Ede, and Lunsford, it links collaborative writing to social cognition and practical classroom needs, then distinguishes collaboration from cooperation by emphasizing process over externally verifiable answers.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages10

Reading Time25 min

AccessFree to download

Purpose

What Is Collaboration?: A Theoretical Framework

What Is Collaboration?: Collaboration vs. Cooperation

The CEA Forum Summer/Fall 2008: 37.2 Next: Making Lemonade "I'M THE AUTHOR OF THIS PAPER": COLLABORATION AND THE CONSTRUCT OF AUTHORSHIP IN A FIRST-YEAR ENGLISH COURSE Jacob Stratman and Matthew Van Zee Purpose It is the scope of this article to present a theoretical framework for successful collaboration and our ideas on how it might be implemented in a first-year college composition classroom. We began by creating a collaborative assignment for our composition classes based on a very cursory understanding of successful collaboration. In light of this experience and our exploration of the theory, we argue that collaboration can be effective in the freshman writing course; however, conventions of successful collaboration must be taught and not just assigned. This article offers a means of doing just that. What Is Collaboration?: A Theoretical Framework In order to lay the groundwork for collaboration, we must first examine the notion of authorship. Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford tell us that the notion of the individual author is a highly constructed cultural phenomenon. In spite of this, most teachers approach writing assignments from the assumption that writing is a highly individualized act (112) . This could in no small part be due to the fact that as a society we are burdened by the idea that writing must somehow bean element of individual ownership. In order to demonstrate how this notion has been a function of historical and societal change, Ede and Lunsford describe how the Middle Ages' collective view of texts, in which “there was no distinction between the person who wrote a text and the person who copied it,” was gradually transformed into our modern notion of writing as personal intellectual property through the emphasis on the individual that characterized both the Renaissance and the Romantic period (77-79, 85) . In short, the “concepts of authorship and of intellectual property rights that we take for granted” were once “noncommonsensical and nonobvious”(84) . What flows logically from this is the assumption that a teacher is not necessarily being true to the way the world works if he or she only assigns tasks that involve individual authorship. In fact, the work of some theorists suggest quite the opposite—that collaborative writing might have psychological grounding in addition to Ede and Lunsford's historical groundwork. Building on the notion that thinking is social—from Vygotsky and others—Kenneth Bruffee posits, “If thought is internalized public and social talk, then writing of all kinds is internalized social talk made public and social again. If thought is internalized conversation, then writing is internalized conversation re-externalized”(419-422) . Thus, collaborative writing assignments create a forum that reflects the way knowledge is actually played out in human experience. But aside from such historical and theoretical grounds for collaborative writing's importance, there are pragmatic concerns that inform the issue. As Bruffee tells us, colleges found that students were not prepared for the rigors of the collegiate classroom, yet these same students “refused help when it was offered”(417) . Emphasizing collaboration, then, seems a logical way for students to develop practices that help them utilize the resources around them. Even Ede and Lunsford, who espouse collaboration almost exclusively from the standpoint that it is good because of its consistency with human reality, see collaboration as beneficial for its pragmatic benefits: “Writing teachers err if, in envisioning students' professional lives upon graduation they imagine them seated alone, writing in isolation… struggling in a professional garret to express themselves”(72) . Put simply, teachers should teach collaborative writing in some way because students will likely need to write collaboratively someday; failing to teach collaborative writing is on some level willfully neglecting an often-necessary life and career

FAQs

What is the main purpose of the article?

It presents a theoretical framework for successful collaboration and explains how to implement it in a first-year college composition classroom. It argues that collaboration is effective only when its conventions are taught, not just assigned.

How does the article explain authorship?

It treats authorship as a highly constructed cultural phenomenon rather than a natural, individual trait. It describes how historical change transformed collective text practices into the modern idea of writing as personal intellectual property.

How does collaboration differ from cooperation in academic work?

The article distinguishes collaboration from cooperation by arguing that cooperation aims at an externally verifiable reality and a defined answer. Collaboration, in contrast, focuses on socially constructed knowledge and emphasizes the process when ends are more disputable.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by SANS