Thoughts on "The Process Approach to Writing Instruction":
On Emig's study of 12th graders' composition habits, I found the "reflexive"/"extensive" result interesting. I would not have guessed that the distinction in process would lie between logic and emotions (logos and pathos, if you will). What's more is I can't imagine a paper in which a student would be writing to convey/explore an emotion as opposed to a message. I guess this comes from my own (extensive) writing habits where I believe what I bring to the paper is not as important as how I present what I am saying (very message-centric).
Although I don't agree that writing is as
black and white as Elbow's view, I do agree that there is a good amount of
problem solving involved in the writing process. Honestly, it is a really good
(neater) way to look at revision. And I think this view can make revision more
manageable for some.
Luckily the definition of
"professional writers" has extended greatly. Although in my own mind,
I still privately assess a writer's success by how many books they have
or have not written; I still see "literary author" as the ultimate
professional writer.
It is not surprising that the studies conducted show that focusing
on the process improves the product. We talked about this many times last
semester.
I am surprised to see that creativity did not increase. I know a
technically good paper doesn’t always have to be colorful, but I would think
that learning new ways to write and (if we use Elbow’s POV) problem solve, I
would think creativity would increase simultaneously. Or at the very least
subconsciously?
Good distinction between “editing” and “revising”
The research regarding the NWP wasn’t very surprising to me at
all. Although the idea that the absence of one learning component can improve
writing better than its presence is interesting to me. Here I am (for some
reason) thinking specifically about the absence of vocabulary lessons. Naturally,
it makes sense that the less things students need to learn about, the easier it
will be to focus on other what they do
need to learn. However, it strikes me as interesting to think that vocabulary
lessons could be one of the things intruding on the developing writing process.
Overall impression of this article/chapter: it was alright; it was
interesting enough, however, I do not feel that I learned very much. This, to
me, seemed to discuss many things we have already covered together in other
classes/discussions. Furthermore, the information seemed kind of obvious/ not excessively
groundbreaking. However, it was a nice read and it was reassuring to know that
there are tests being done to support what we as teachers (and aspiring
teachers) already believe: namely, that the process matters.
No comments:
Post a Comment