The Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing By: Louise M. Rosenblatt Presented by: Liz Guzniczak & Sue Ann Sharma Edu 707 Dr. J. McEneaney

The Transactional Paradigm The essence of Rosenblatts’ philosophy “The human being is seen as part of nature, continuously in transaction with an environment-each one conditions the other…Human activities and relationships are seen as transaction in which the individual and social elements fuse with cultural and natural elements.” (p. 1059)

Transactional Relationships “Unfractured observation of the whole situation” Each element conditions & is conditioned by the other mutually

Language The Knower, Knowing & Known Public vs. Private Meaning Semiotics Peircean- Triadic Model (Transaction of Sign, Object & Mind) Speech & Language

Linguistic Transactions Text is shaped by both the speaker and addressee Transact With Non-verbal Signs Text Transact With Signs On A Page

Selective Attention Choosing An Activity Owners of our own attention & focus through the use of kinesthetic, cognitive, affective, and associative domains Thought triggers selective attention There are degrees of attentiveness dependent on our emotions and desires involved “…to be truly critical is to be selective” (Rosenblatt, 1994, p. 187)

Flying planes can be dangerous The Reading Process Evocation is not “in” the text or “in” the reader, but in the transaction between the reader and text What theory is the new definition of reading based on? Chomsky (1968) syntax and signs are parts of text that are dependent on transactions: Flying planes can be dangerous

Reader’s Stance Continuum from efferent to aesthetic reading that reader’s select Efferent = Public Meaning Aesthetic= Private Meaning Metacognitively you set a purpose for reading (Selective Attention)

The Efferent Stance What am I gleaning from the text? What am I going to do after reading the text? Analytical structure of information

The Aesthetic Stance Lived through experience Includes senses, feeling, and intuitions Evocation (understanding) is the object of the reader’s response and interpretation both during and after reading Metaphors can cue an aesthetic stance

The Continuum Efferent satisfaction can come from someone else's paraphrase Aesthetic satisfaction must come from within an individual Middle ranges of efferent-aesthetic continuum are sometimes interwoven simultaneously – this is the messy area that tends to project the reader’s prior understandings Expressed Response – a recapturing of the effect, i.e. Oprah’s Book Club-evocation is being clarified Expressed Interpretation – report (parts to whole, analyze (prior understanding) and explain (interpretation) the evocation Evocation effects our selective stance

The Writing Transaction

Authorial Reading a as Writer

Communication Between Author and Readers Validity of Interpretation Warranted Assertibility-agreement on shared criteria of validity of interpretation, i.e. Supreme Court decisions->Interpretation of Hamlet Criteria based on purpose between the Efferent-Aesthetic Continuum “Literary” Aspects of Efferent Reading, i.e. “Wave” theory of light & Shakespeare “Like as the wave makes toward the pebbled shore/So do our minutes hasten to their end”

Implications for Teaching We cannot assume that the teaching of one activity, either reading or writing automatically improves the student’s competence in the other. It can affect the student’s operations Big Point The reading and writing connection reinforced with conversation and playing with ideas will result in what you attend to and how you construct meaning (The Transaction Process)

Thoughts to Ponder “Despite the overemphasis on the efferent in our schools, failure to understand the matter of the public-private “mix” has prevented successful teaching even of efferent reading and writing”(p.1084). What is the “main diet” of literature that a child receives in school? Do we try to create environments and activities in reading & writing that result in a “lived through experience” for students?

Implications for Research Piaget’s work exemplifies preoccupation with the efferent Qualitative research is counterbalancing growing interest in the affective domain Ethnographic studies of classroom practices can help understand more fully how teachers can facilitate learning better as a “guide on the side” rather than a “sage on a stage” Rosenblatt believes in correlational research, do you believe that qualitative methods of research should become the foundation for any quantitative methods of research to answer “the why”?

Criticisms Theorists see literary and nonliterary works as a dichotomy versus a continuum-this may generate problems of interpretation and evaluation (Rosenblatt, 1994) Reader Response Criticism- Steven Mailloux reader/text distinction has been dismantled Do we continue to accept dualistic theories or should we buy into Rosenblatt’s Transactional Model?