After Process

     Geoffrey Sirc asserts that bland architecture results in simplified compositional programs that ignore the complexity and contradictions of everyday life and that the reason we, as educators, settle for such simplistic compositional programs is because of our diffidence that stems from the (perceived) status of composition and writing in the academic field. In short, composition studies teachers are caught up in establishing our status as "academic" or "professional" that we find ourselves engulfed in "order" and that which is "authoritarian". Sirc later asserts that the cause of the overall lull in the field of composition studies is "composition's professionalization, it's self-tormented quest for disciplinary stature." What's odd is, I can see precisely where Sirc is coming from. I understand that composition itself should be THE "place" for intellectual inquiry but has become a "service course designed to further the goals of other academic units". So my first question would be whether or not educators of freshman composition are in agreement with his overall concern or to what degree? More than anything, I simply wonder if composition studies has sacrificed too much of the elements which make it composition, a form of art, for the sake of being deemed a branch of college-level academic.
    Nancy Dejoy argues that first-year writing educators wouldn't use process pedagogy as a rule or "law" but rather as an approach to teaching writing and calls