· What different kinds of information emerge from the two types of analysis? What does each reveal or conceal?
· When or why might one type of analysis be more useful than another?
· In what ways do these types of analysis inform each other or reveal weaknesses in each other?
In the matter of audience addressed, this type of writing may work as a genre to appeal to a very specific audience. Speech writers for politicians may prefer this method when considering a topic or issue for the individual speaking. Oral rhetoric is decidedly different than the written word, but I found this to be the best example. Audience addressed allows the write to focus specifically on content geared toward his audience, whomever that may be. It allows him to decide which medium may best carry his message. What is the appropriate tone to take? One of the limitations of this method is that the writer may focus so exclusively on one set group that he may neglect to take into account his unintended audience. This method of writing undoubtedly works best when the writer has a very clear idea of who his actual audience will be.
Audience invoked provides the writer with much the same information as the technique of audience addressed does. However, this method may allow the writer to focus more on his message. Too much clarity regarding audience may give the writer tunnel vision when it comes to the message he is trying to convey. If the writer himself is free to create the stage, we may find a text that is more open in its tone, as the writer may seek to appeal to as many audience members as possible. Or a writer may envision that his audience knows little about the topic he is speaking of. In such a case, we may find ourselves as readers (or audience) exposed in more detail to the message the writer is passing along. One flaw of this method is that the message may become too general. It may lack focus.
All writers tread a fine line where audience is concerned, save perhaps writers of fiction. One might argue the writer must strive to put his best effort into his message for his audience addressed rather than audience invoked. The members of the audience addressed are more likely to be a receptive audience. Writers may imagine themselves appeal to a large base of people with audience invoked, but we must remember this is a concept the writer is dealing with only in his own mind. Audience addressed is the true forum in which his message must play out.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Response to Ede and Lunsford
The whole sum of this article is Ede and Lunsford believe that teachers fall into one of two extremes: the instructor who concentrates far too much on the audience and the instructor who ignores the audience component completely. I believe that to make such an argument may be too rash. Seldom have I seen instructors who ignore completely the aspect of audience. Much of the emphasis on writing is in at least producing a product that is capable of relaying the message the author intends. Without audience, who is to provide that feedback?
Ede and Lunsford are correct in saying that in most cases, the audience for student writing is the instructor. The instructor could therefore be termed "audience addressed," which according to the authors are the people who actually read the writing of the author. "Audience imagined" refers to those the author believes himself to be writing to. He imagines that these are the people who will read his writing.
The concept of audience is not the most important aspect of writing, but it is not one that should be ignored. Message and content are perhaps the most important. The audience plays a role in shaping that message. Whom should the author write to? In what manner should he convey his message so that it has the most impact? While the audience may not provided purpose (as suggested by other authors we have read so far this semester), the audience does influence composition and the language of a piece---its "tone" so to speak.
Ede and Lunsford are correct in saying that in most cases, the audience for student writing is the instructor. The instructor could therefore be termed "audience addressed," which according to the authors are the people who actually read the writing of the author. "Audience imagined" refers to those the author believes himself to be writing to. He imagines that these are the people who will read his writing.
The concept of audience is not the most important aspect of writing, but it is not one that should be ignored. Message and content are perhaps the most important. The audience plays a role in shaping that message. Whom should the author write to? In what manner should he convey his message so that it has the most impact? While the audience may not provided purpose (as suggested by other authors we have read so far this semester), the audience does influence composition and the language of a piece---its "tone" so to speak.
Monday, September 24, 2007
In Matters Of Audience
It was clear to me from today's in-class work that the students were stuck on how to best broach the topic of audience with our tutees. This includes myself. The problem with academic writing is that too often the teacher is the intended audience. A clever instructor might tell his students to envision that he is writing for a literary critic or perhaps a newspaper panel...but students usually have a hard time sustaining the ruse. A thought occured to me that the emphasis we placed today on audience might work best if emphasis is returned to the paper. Through a clarification of goals, should not the matter of audience fall easily into place? Or, if not easily, should the student at least have a more specific idea of whom he is writing to?
Does the imaginary audience ever become real? Through clarification of goals, the writer can produce a more tightly organized document. For instance, if one is writing a summary of an article detailing Paradise Lost, the student should consider his audience to be fellow Advanced Literary students. In a larger sense, his audience will be academic. Dr. Wilcox presented the issue in this manner: When writing a summary, think of it this way. Write it down and then go and ask the author if this is what he meant. Again, this would be done in an imaginary context, of course.
My group brought up the implication that we need to find common themes among members of the audience. This method may translate better to some genres than to others. The example offered was that of our school newspaper. A common thread that resonates within this audience is an interest in Elmhurst College.
As writers gearing a piece towards a specific audience, we perhaps need to ask two questions:
Who am I writing for?
What is the message I want others to take away from this piece and why?
Asking these questions leads the writer down a path that enables him to fine tune what he desires his work to be and the message that it presents. The piece and the audience should not be regarded as two separate entities, but rather as parts of one process. What is the message and how does one broadcast it?
Does the imaginary audience ever become real? Through clarification of goals, the writer can produce a more tightly organized document. For instance, if one is writing a summary of an article detailing Paradise Lost, the student should consider his audience to be fellow Advanced Literary students. In a larger sense, his audience will be academic. Dr. Wilcox presented the issue in this manner: When writing a summary, think of it this way. Write it down and then go and ask the author if this is what he meant. Again, this would be done in an imaginary context, of course.
My group brought up the implication that we need to find common themes among members of the audience. This method may translate better to some genres than to others. The example offered was that of our school newspaper. A common thread that resonates within this audience is an interest in Elmhurst College.
As writers gearing a piece towards a specific audience, we perhaps need to ask two questions:
Who am I writing for?
What is the message I want others to take away from this piece and why?
Asking these questions leads the writer down a path that enables him to fine tune what he desires his work to be and the message that it presents. The piece and the audience should not be regarded as two separate entities, but rather as parts of one process. What is the message and how does one broadcast it?
Response to Ong
Ong's essay, "The Writer's Audience is Always Fiction," takes a look at the differences among the audiences of written and verbal communication. For Ong, the concept of audience is much more a part of vocal communication as opposed to written. The speaker is more likely to know who his audience is and can therefore adapt his speech accordingly. In written communication, Ong says that the writer has no such advantage. Only to a certain degree can the writer predict his audience. He cannot know the mood of the audience, the climate in which is work his read, or a multitude of other things that might affect the meaning of his words. As a speaker, individuals have instantaneous feedback and can adjust the speech accordingly. The feedback for writers takes much longer and often we cannot revise our words until it is too late---the audiene has already walked away with one meaning.
Ong felt the best way to combat this was for the writer to imagine the different roles his audience might be taking on in regard to the writing. Is the audience made up of academics, students, or the general public and how might the message be adjusted accordingly so that eache member of the audience gleans some small idea of the content the author is trying to pass along? While Ong concentrates mostly on the area of classical literature, in the last paragraphs of his article, he states that this argument applies to all genres of writing. He goes so far to suggest that history and even our personal communication is "fictionalized" to a degree since two writers rarely tell the same tale.
Ong felt the best way to combat this was for the writer to imagine the different roles his audience might be taking on in regard to the writing. Is the audience made up of academics, students, or the general public and how might the message be adjusted accordingly so that eache member of the audience gleans some small idea of the content the author is trying to pass along? While Ong concentrates mostly on the area of classical literature, in the last paragraphs of his article, he states that this argument applies to all genres of writing. He goes so far to suggest that history and even our personal communication is "fictionalized" to a degree since two writers rarely tell the same tale.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Random Fact
I haven't found the study as of yet. My M-I-L told me today that Cornell University did a study that shows the act of holding a pencil in your hand increases learning. Mind you, this doesn't mean the student is taking notes. It appears to be related to the mere act of holding a pencil. The information came from when she was in college for the first time (1970's) so it may be outdated....or may have since been disproven.
Friday, September 21, 2007
9/21/01 Classwork
Instructors have abandoned many of the practices that used to be common in classrooms. The five paragraph model, so emphasized at the junior high level, is criticized by many educators at the secondary level. Instructors want more sophisticated work than the five paragraph method seems to allow. Instead, they are teaching various templates: narrative, compare and contrast, ect. Worse yet, secondary education teachers assume their students are familiar with these models and briefly skim the template before assigning a particular writing project. In many schools, students are segregated in regards to writing. General education courses in English remain a requirement but at one particular high school I am thinking of, students are assigned to a type of writing that they will be taught. College bound students are exposed to a wider variety of writing process theories. Such students study literature and formulate writing projects based on the reading; others are limited to the teaching of writing as it applies to business or technical writing.
Another way that I have noticed the instruction of writing shifting is that it is gearing away from the traditional emphasis on final product. In my daughter's second grade class, the students routinely write stories in a journal which is handed into the teacher at the end of every week. In part this process is meant to emphasize capitalization, grammar, and sentence structure as the teacher corrects mistakes in these areas accordingly. However, she does encourage the creative side of writing in this assignment by statements s such as, "How does this end?" or "Tell me more about this." This manner of teaching emphasizes the creative aspects of writing and simple topics such as grammar. Although this assignment takes places in a second grade classroom, I believe the teacher has the most effective approach in regards to writing.
A carefully crafted balance between structure and invention is a method that may be used by any instructor at any level. To further demonstrate how truly effective this process is, students edit and continue to add to the journals throughout the year. The project is never truly finished until the end of the year and even after it is finished, the students have a final product which to refer to. Since most believe that the reading process is part of writing, the usefulness of this assignment continues to influence the student.
Another way in which the conversation of how to teach writing has shifted is that many no longer consider one final product as an adequate means to judge a student's writing. Many instructors use a portfolio method, in which students gather several writing projects for the review of the instructor over a term of a semester. This prevents an overview of the students work. Problems within one genre may not present themselves in another. For instances, writers who are proficient in the creative aspects of writing may have trouble formulating a research paper. The variety of assignments helps the instructor assess student strengths and weaknesses which allows for more specific occasion for instruction regarding those strengths and weaknesses.
Another way that I have noticed the instruction of writing shifting is that it is gearing away from the traditional emphasis on final product. In my daughter's second grade class, the students routinely write stories in a journal which is handed into the teacher at the end of every week. In part this process is meant to emphasize capitalization, grammar, and sentence structure as the teacher corrects mistakes in these areas accordingly. However, she does encourage the creative side of writing in this assignment by statements s such as, "How does this end?" or "Tell me more about this." This manner of teaching emphasizes the creative aspects of writing and simple topics such as grammar. Although this assignment takes places in a second grade classroom, I believe the teacher has the most effective approach in regards to writing.
A carefully crafted balance between structure and invention is a method that may be used by any instructor at any level. To further demonstrate how truly effective this process is, students edit and continue to add to the journals throughout the year. The project is never truly finished until the end of the year and even after it is finished, the students have a final product which to refer to. Since most believe that the reading process is part of writing, the usefulness of this assignment continues to influence the student.
Another way in which the conversation of how to teach writing has shifted is that many no longer consider one final product as an adequate means to judge a student's writing. Many instructors use a portfolio method, in which students gather several writing projects for the review of the instructor over a term of a semester. This prevents an overview of the students work. Problems within one genre may not present themselves in another. For instances, writers who are proficient in the creative aspects of writing may have trouble formulating a research paper. The variety of assignments helps the instructor assess student strengths and weaknesses which allows for more specific occasion for instruction regarding those strengths and weaknesses.
Post Process Pedagogy Response
The quote I found most relevant in this article was "The writing process was not, in other words, so much discovered as created" as stated by Geoge Pullman in his essay Stepping Yet Again Into the Same Current. Breuch suggests to her reader that the elements of writing can be taught in a manner that can be broken down into a useful model that students can use. She admits first in her article that it is difficult to apply this method of teaching writing. Research has shown that translating the value system one has in regards to writing is a difficult, if not impossible task. The process of writing as most accept it (prewriting, writing, revision) is one that many scholars are beginning to distance themselves from as doubts arise that writing can be taught in such a manner. By the end of her article, Breuch suggests to her readers that while this may be possible, it works best in a one on one situation. This way, students have more control over the level of participation.
Breuch also states in her article that writing should also be thought of in this manner: It is public, interpretive, and situated. A writer must always keep in mind his audience. Once writing is complete, is shall and always will be open to interpretation by that same audience. The author cites a few sources who believe that interpretation never ceases. Work produced in the 18th century might well be open to interpretation in the 21st. (The U.S. Constitution is a prime example of this.) What is the reader to do then? Should the reader continue to interpret such a document as it was originally intended or does interpretation change with the times and with the audience?
Breuch encourages teachers to use the pedagogy method sparingly and to lean towards the post process theory. The latter method, she feels, pays more attention to the needs of students. Teaching a method of writing that works for each student often comes down to the individual student himself, but the post process theory is more attuned to addressing the student's individuality as opposed to pedagogy, which seems to offer a "one size fits all" approach.
Breuch also states in her article that writing should also be thought of in this manner: It is public, interpretive, and situated. A writer must always keep in mind his audience. Once writing is complete, is shall and always will be open to interpretation by that same audience. The author cites a few sources who believe that interpretation never ceases. Work produced in the 18th century might well be open to interpretation in the 21st. (The U.S. Constitution is a prime example of this.) What is the reader to do then? Should the reader continue to interpret such a document as it was originally intended or does interpretation change with the times and with the audience?
Breuch encourages teachers to use the pedagogy method sparingly and to lean towards the post process theory. The latter method, she feels, pays more attention to the needs of students. Teaching a method of writing that works for each student often comes down to the individual student himself, but the post process theory is more attuned to addressing the student's individuality as opposed to pedagogy, which seems to offer a "one size fits all" approach.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Perl and Sommers reading response
Both authors conducted studies to distinguish patterns in the way students write. This was done primarily by studying the process of revision. Sondra Perl's study focuses on five students who termed themselves as poor writers and followed the methods they used throughout the writing process. As with Murray's study, Perl operates under the assumption that her audience is full of teachers and offers her suggestions more along the lines of how to help students overcome difficulties in composition. She feels the research itself in the area of composition studies is limited and that her own study is no different in this manner. In fact, the very last part of her study concentrates on one student only. One could argue this makes the data highly unreliable. That aside, I found that Perl offers suggestions of the more practical sort, although she does occassionally leave the reader to grapple with her meaning. Perl does make every attempt to be as thorough as possible in her study. She defines a code system and assigns each student a code accordingly. After the code is assigned, she then goes on to make observations about the pattern of writing each student possesses.
The piece of Nancy Sommers, while equally useful to the instructor, concentrates less on patterns. Author Sommers states the view that revision is not as well used through the process of writing as it could be. As opposed to leaving revision as a final step in the writing process, she feels that it should be used throughout. It is her view that revision is what firmly establishes writing as different from speech. Revision should not be limited to what the writer has already stated. The writer should not be held to what he has already put down on paper. Is there something else he was trying to say? Rather than merely clarifying and explaining further the concepts already established in a paper, Sommers feels the author should have a chance to modify meaning as well. Further in the article Sommers further demonstrates this theory by stating that thesis statements can restrict the meaning of a what a student is trying to say. Instead of allowing ideas to expand, a thesis narrows the focus too much, sometimes so much that the student cannot find anything else to say and is therefore stuck with the words he has already uttered.
The piece of Nancy Sommers, while equally useful to the instructor, concentrates less on patterns. Author Sommers states the view that revision is not as well used through the process of writing as it could be. As opposed to leaving revision as a final step in the writing process, she feels that it should be used throughout. It is her view that revision is what firmly establishes writing as different from speech. Revision should not be limited to what the writer has already stated. The writer should not be held to what he has already put down on paper. Is there something else he was trying to say? Rather than merely clarifying and explaining further the concepts already established in a paper, Sommers feels the author should have a chance to modify meaning as well. Further in the article Sommers further demonstrates this theory by stating that thesis statements can restrict the meaning of a what a student is trying to say. Instead of allowing ideas to expand, a thesis narrows the focus too much, sometimes so much that the student cannot find anything else to say and is therefore stuck with the words he has already uttered.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Murray and Emig
I agree with Murray more so than Emig. While I believe that writing is a process best left unfinished, I also believe in the creative nature of the process. Process is best left with wide boundaries that open the mind to creativity. Emig concentrates far too much on the role of learning as it relates to writing. While I do not deny that writing plays a pivotal role in learning, I feel that to concentrate too much on the learning takes away from the writing itself. Murray advocates a method that is student centered and works to promote creativity within the author's understanding of the material. His first five implications deal strictly with the student: Let the student use his own language, let the student organize his ideas, let the student decide his subject matter, ect.
Emig has the same praise for writing and its usefulness in the world of academia, but she has far too much to say on the ultimate goal of writing as it relates to learning. To embellish upon a point I made in class today, there is only so much learning involved in writing. Learning through the process of writing requires that the student be actively engaged in the subject matter. So much academic writing---abstracts for example---only offer the writer an opportunity to rephrase the words of the original author. This at best resembles repetition, which as a learning tool has its uses, but it only goes so far. It does not develop analytical skills. It does not enhance the author's ability to make an argument and support it with text.
The ideal model may fall somewhere between Murray and Emig's ideal. We should take from Murray's article the ideals that writing is a creative, never-ending process that should be student-centered. From Emig, we should promote the ideal of writing as a tool for learning, although we should stress that the writer needs to think about the words he is putting on paper in more than just a surface sense. This may be why in matters of literary analysis I am so reader focused. What did I personally take away from the texts? In matters of literary analysis, when I read an article by another author critiquing the original material, what is my understanding of the ideas the author is writing about? (This applies both to the text being studied and the companion reading.) I feel that as long as a reader clearly understands the concepts, the reader should be free to discuss his opinion on the matter and how he or she would implement the ideas of the author to the original text.
Emig has the same praise for writing and its usefulness in the world of academia, but she has far too much to say on the ultimate goal of writing as it relates to learning. To embellish upon a point I made in class today, there is only so much learning involved in writing. Learning through the process of writing requires that the student be actively engaged in the subject matter. So much academic writing---abstracts for example---only offer the writer an opportunity to rephrase the words of the original author. This at best resembles repetition, which as a learning tool has its uses, but it only goes so far. It does not develop analytical skills. It does not enhance the author's ability to make an argument and support it with text.
The ideal model may fall somewhere between Murray and Emig's ideal. We should take from Murray's article the ideals that writing is a creative, never-ending process that should be student-centered. From Emig, we should promote the ideal of writing as a tool for learning, although we should stress that the writer needs to think about the words he is putting on paper in more than just a surface sense. This may be why in matters of literary analysis I am so reader focused. What did I personally take away from the texts? In matters of literary analysis, when I read an article by another author critiquing the original material, what is my understanding of the ideas the author is writing about? (This applies both to the text being studied and the companion reading.) I feel that as long as a reader clearly understands the concepts, the reader should be free to discuss his opinion on the matter and how he or she would implement the ideas of the author to the original text.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Writing and Social Change
I would state that the article plains states that trends in society heavily influence what we believe education is and what it should do. The trends in my own period ( 1900-1917) showed a curriculum that became more about producing highly functional workers rather than enlightened individuals who could argue what texts meant. Of course, as time went on, that changed. I noticed that the periods would seem to shift from focusing on the individual to focusing on the community itself and the individuals role in that community. One could make the argument that the struggle society seems to be involved in is the role of education as far as it goes to producing individuals of good "quality." John Dewey that education is specifically engineered to produce persons that would be of use to the "democratic community."
Dewey felt that while education should enable individual's to make use of their talents, these talents should mainly be developed for the benefit of the community. (Yes, I'm a Dewey fan.) The cultural continuities that are highlighted by this argument confirm that we feel education plays a vital role in the development of the individual. Although this at first seems too simplistic an observation, we must remember that as society's view of community shifts, usually the role education is meant to play shifts as well.
We have gone from producing highly enlightened individuals to individuals who are highly aware of matters of community today's philosophy that requires individuals have elements of both---as if somehow through personal awareness and education, we can make our communities a better place. It is not a philosophy of one for all to say or all for one so to say, but rather a philosophy of one that sees the needs of the community and acts upon them.
Dewey felt that while education should enable individual's to make use of their talents, these talents should mainly be developed for the benefit of the community. (Yes, I'm a Dewey fan.) The cultural continuities that are highlighted by this argument confirm that we feel education plays a vital role in the development of the individual. Although this at first seems too simplistic an observation, we must remember that as society's view of community shifts, usually the role education is meant to play shifts as well.
We have gone from producing highly enlightened individuals to individuals who are highly aware of matters of community today's philosophy that requires individuals have elements of both---as if somehow through personal awareness and education, we can make our communities a better place. It is not a philosophy of one for all to say or all for one so to say, but rather a philosophy of one that sees the needs of the community and acts upon them.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
1900-1917
The primary concern of this time seems to be the preparation of American workers for jobs in a society that was becoming increasingly industrialized. Rather than focus on college preparations---of which only four percent of the United States population at the time was attending college---instructors decided that an emphasis should be made to ensure that students could read and write well, without overemphasazing either discipline. John Dewey was formulating his theories of education at this time. He wanted education to produce a democratic, productive citizen, one who could serve the country for the public good. Only some attention was paid to the needs of the individual. American education became more about producing individuals with solid education, although that didn't necessarily mean college bound students. It should also be noted that during this time it was decided that the instruction of literature and the instruction of writing should become two separate disciplines.
The article as a whole portrays an educational system that shifts at the whims of society. As needs changed, so did the education system. The more industrialized the nation became, a greater demand developed for educated individuals who could at the very least read and write. While the elite still held onto institutions such as Harvard and Yale, "land grant" universities as they were called, began to spring up in the rest of the country. It could be argued that higher education was still a priority of the elite but a public school system was in the process of forming that required a solid educational base for all.
The period of 1900 -1917 was all about determining the shifting needs of education as men like Dewey and Scott came to prominence. Changes in curriculum determined that writing and literature should actually be taught as two separate courses. Writing at this time underwent changes as well. Creative writing was seen more as an activity for the lower grades while students in the ninth grade and above were often subjected to a method that taught more "practical" writing skills in preparation for the work force.
The article as a whole portrays an educational system that shifts at the whims of society. As needs changed, so did the education system. The more industrialized the nation became, a greater demand developed for educated individuals who could at the very least read and write. While the elite still held onto institutions such as Harvard and Yale, "land grant" universities as they were called, began to spring up in the rest of the country. It could be argued that higher education was still a priority of the elite but a public school system was in the process of forming that required a solid educational base for all.
The period of 1900 -1917 was all about determining the shifting needs of education as men like Dewey and Scott came to prominence. Changes in curriculum determined that writing and literature should actually be taught as two separate courses. Writing at this time underwent changes as well. Creative writing was seen more as an activity for the lower grades while students in the ninth grade and above were often subjected to a method that taught more "practical" writing skills in preparation for the work force.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
Post for Friday
Purpose and provocation. These two words fit well into any discussion of writing, yes? As writers, we seek a purpose for the words we put down on a page. In kind, those very words were usually provoked by something. Graff and Birkenstein start out chapter one, "They Say," with a story that emphasizes just that. Clarity of purpose is obviously a huge element of thesis development, so why would the authors feel so compelled to point this out? Perhaps due to the fact even though most writers try, some forget. The passion behind the purpose and provocation at times has the writer drowning in his own sea of opinions, examples, and the like. Detailing what others have said is always a good start to what you as a writer have to say. It certainly never hurts.
Today I had the misfortune, or fortune as it turned out to be, of clearing out old furniture. In doing so, a toy kitchen of my daughter's caught the attention of our clearing out frenzy. The toy was perfectly usable, but sitting in a corner gathering dust since seven year olds don't show much interest in toy kitchens. I do have a point here (no need to fear that I've gone off the deep end and am suffering from writer's block.) At any rate, the kitchen might have found additional life in a garage sale, but ended up at the curb instead. An hour after it was set out, a grandmotherly type of advanced years came knocking on the door and asked if she might offer me some money for the kitchen. I was so startled by her comment I didn't properly consider what she was telling me---that she had an adopted granddaughter who would just love the toy. I told her by no means was it necessary to pay me for the kitchen, and that she was welcome to take it. What was it doing in my house, save for gathering dust?
Words are sometimes like a toy kitchen. They sit in a corner gathering dust, or sit on a page, hoping to be noticed. Templates are like those toy kitchens that Graff and Birkenstein are always pushing us into. The basic nature of what we start out with is the same, but every little girl creates her own little world from that kitchen...er...template. Apart from provocation and purpose, Graff and Birkenstein are quick to point out that the best writing is like a conversation. One sided communication doesn't inspire much learning, let alone much thinking. To be fully developed, the best writing allows for two voices in one paper. Call it an argument and counterargument if you like. The point is to stir something up.
Templates and the "moves" that Graff and Birkenstein suggest may seem too formal to bring to a tutoring session. It depends on how such things are implemented. A starting point is better than a blank sheet of paper. To conclude with a point mentioned in another article, tutors should save themselves from the "savior" mentality by allowing the tutee to see that templates provide a setting. From that basic setting, products of great imagination are produced.
Today I had the misfortune, or fortune as it turned out to be, of clearing out old furniture. In doing so, a toy kitchen of my daughter's caught the attention of our clearing out frenzy. The toy was perfectly usable, but sitting in a corner gathering dust since seven year olds don't show much interest in toy kitchens. I do have a point here (no need to fear that I've gone off the deep end and am suffering from writer's block.) At any rate, the kitchen might have found additional life in a garage sale, but ended up at the curb instead. An hour after it was set out, a grandmotherly type of advanced years came knocking on the door and asked if she might offer me some money for the kitchen. I was so startled by her comment I didn't properly consider what she was telling me---that she had an adopted granddaughter who would just love the toy. I told her by no means was it necessary to pay me for the kitchen, and that she was welcome to take it. What was it doing in my house, save for gathering dust?
Words are sometimes like a toy kitchen. They sit in a corner gathering dust, or sit on a page, hoping to be noticed. Templates are like those toy kitchens that Graff and Birkenstein are always pushing us into. The basic nature of what we start out with is the same, but every little girl creates her own little world from that kitchen...er...template. Apart from provocation and purpose, Graff and Birkenstein are quick to point out that the best writing is like a conversation. One sided communication doesn't inspire much learning, let alone much thinking. To be fully developed, the best writing allows for two voices in one paper. Call it an argument and counterargument if you like. The point is to stir something up.
Templates and the "moves" that Graff and Birkenstein suggest may seem too formal to bring to a tutoring session. It depends on how such things are implemented. A starting point is better than a blank sheet of paper. To conclude with a point mentioned in another article, tutors should save themselves from the "savior" mentality by allowing the tutee to see that templates provide a setting. From that basic setting, products of great imagination are produced.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Response to Exercise #2
In the Introduction of "They Say, I Say," the authors of this book provide ready models to help students clearly articulate their views during the writing process. Such templates help flesh out the words of students who may be floundering in regard of what to say. Although the templates may seem simplistic to some, such items are of great use to a student struggling to find a way to communicate through words. What comes so easily to some is not always the case for others. While I appreciate the care and commitment demonstrated in developing these templates, I chose not to use them for the sole purpose that my own writing is often free form first with thought and organization coming after the fact.
Students who never lack for an opinion may at times be uncertain of how to put those very strong, very well thought out opinions into a written form. It is not a situation that need continue to strike fear into the heart of any student. The templates provided by the authors provide an very understandable methodolgy that will enable students to piece together thoughts and arguments. These same models provide for an opportunity to polish organizational skills as well. The ability to strengthen an argument by fleshing out examples is also detailed by the authors.
I found the rationale offered by the authors Graff and Birkenstein to be highly sensible. If the process of writing can be broken down into a simple template that anyone can understand, why not review and use this model until the student becomes a more proficient writer? Those of us who have never had trouble with the written word may not well understand the feeling of a student who sits at a desk for hours unable to compose a single word until well into the night when sheer exhaustion leads said student to pound out something not always recognizable as academic writing.
The tone of the book invites the reader to explore further. It may also be the intent of our instructor to use such an easy going book with first year students to lessen any hesitation they may be feeling. I believe the authors did a fine job of taking into account any jitters want to be writers possess and hand out a method that will enable any student to start down the path to producing a fine academic product. Simplistic it may be...but every writer has to start somewhere.
Students who never lack for an opinion may at times be uncertain of how to put those very strong, very well thought out opinions into a written form. It is not a situation that need continue to strike fear into the heart of any student. The templates provided by the authors provide an very understandable methodolgy that will enable students to piece together thoughts and arguments. These same models provide for an opportunity to polish organizational skills as well. The ability to strengthen an argument by fleshing out examples is also detailed by the authors.
I found the rationale offered by the authors Graff and Birkenstein to be highly sensible. If the process of writing can be broken down into a simple template that anyone can understand, why not review and use this model until the student becomes a more proficient writer? Those of us who have never had trouble with the written word may not well understand the feeling of a student who sits at a desk for hours unable to compose a single word until well into the night when sheer exhaustion leads said student to pound out something not always recognizable as academic writing.
The tone of the book invites the reader to explore further. It may also be the intent of our instructor to use such an easy going book with first year students to lessen any hesitation they may be feeling. I believe the authors did a fine job of taking into account any jitters want to be writers possess and hand out a method that will enable any student to start down the path to producing a fine academic product. Simplistic it may be...but every writer has to start somewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)