Abstract

Composition researchers are divided by differing conceptions of writing and of inquiry. Such differences lead to incompatible lines of research, and hinder the development of our understanding of writing. A resolution lies in a conception of writing as symbolization, and in a methodology based on the principles of General Systems Theory. ;Chapter 1 examines text-based, individual-based, and social-based conceptions of writing. It also describes differences among Positivist, Inductivist, Phenomenological, Constructivist, and Humanistic paradigms of inquiry. ;Chapter 2 argues that General Systems Theory provides a methodological synthesis. Systems inquiry requires the researcher to move in successive stages through the speculative, deductive, inductive, and experimental procedures associated with the various paradigms. ;Chapter 3 uses Susanne K. Langer's theory of symbol to describe composing as symbolization. The chapter argues that composition researchers must acknowledge that symbolic activity takes place in many media, not just oral and written language; symbolic meaning involves the interaction of subjectively held conceptions with intended conceptions of reality ; all symbolization is constrained by the confluence of social, individual, and textual factors; symbolization and the formulation of knowledge are interactively related; and symbolization involves interaction of formulative, descriptive, expressive, and rhetorical functions. ;Chapter 4 illustrates symbolic/systemic research by sketching a study of invention in a technical writing classroom. The chapter suggests how to develop symbol-based concepts of composing processes, assess research problems for systemic inquiry, develop appropriate research procedures, and select information from a study in reporting results