(I think I may have done the wrong article before but just in case this was the one that was due Friday, I can't remember if everything was pushed back or if it was taken out all together. Either way I did both.)
Linda Flower and John Hayes discussed composition as a process which entails many decisions and choices that need to be made by the writer. They attack pre-writing, writing, and re-writing because it is a linear model. Flower and Hayes believe that with this process you are not growing inside; only the product grows. Instead of this linear mode they would suggest a cognitive process because it studies what is going on in the writers mind while they are writing a paper. There are three major components in the cognitive writing process and they are planning, translating and reviewing. There are also three elements that are "reflected in three units of the model: the task environment, the writer's long-term memory and the writing process" (pg327). In the category of task environment there are sub-categories the rhetorical problem and the text produced at that moment. At this time it is when the author must pick a topic and set their goals or expectations. Once the writer begins to brainstorm they can begin the writing process. The writer goes into the translating process, this is where they need to get what ideas are in their head onto paper and into a language that their reader will understand. The cognitive process never really ends. There are no clear steps. I also feel this way when I write it is hard but I am always thinking about ways to make it better.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Lunsford and Shaughnessy
Janet Emig and Shaughnessy has made Lunsford think about the relationship of writing and the process of analysis and synthesis to teaching basic writers. Lunsford believes that the students she has studied can perform a task for a specific situation, but they can not abstract from it or replicate it, they simply are not at a cognitive level that would allow them to extract these ideas. Lunsford then goes on to describe Vygotsky and Piaget's mental development which she finds connections to her own studies with students. Lunsford believes that writing classes should never be teacher-centered, but should be held in small groups where everyone is an active participant. She offers some exercises that would help students become better at analytical thinking.
Mina P. Shaughnessy says that writing is a course that requires much more interaction between teachers and students. the exchange between student and teacher about the way a student writes often leads to more information about what is wrong with the student, not the teacher. This suggests that the only person that needs changing is the student and not the teacher. She offers a developmental scale for teachers. Guarding the Tower then Converting the Natives, Sounding the Depths and Diving In. These stages will help the teacher be able to teach.
I do think that it is a difficult task for teachers to teach writing to anyone, but when there is a lot of interaction and a comfortable community to learn in I think that it helps the process.
Mina P. Shaughnessy says that writing is a course that requires much more interaction between teachers and students. the exchange between student and teacher about the way a student writes often leads to more information about what is wrong with the student, not the teacher. This suggests that the only person that needs changing is the student and not the teacher. She offers a developmental scale for teachers. Guarding the Tower then Converting the Natives, Sounding the Depths and Diving In. These stages will help the teacher be able to teach.
I do think that it is a difficult task for teachers to teach writing to anyone, but when there is a lot of interaction and a comfortable community to learn in I think that it helps the process.
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Bitch Magazine
I am really glad that we were able to read Bitch magazine, because the articles helped clarify what the differences between and invoked audience and an addressed audience is. I think that our discussion yesterday made me see that the two forms of audience need to work together. I think by reading this it helped see the issues that Ede and Lunsford were talking about in their article. When looking at Bitch magazine we want to understand the addressed audience first, those are the people that will buy this magazine. With this magazine it's addressed audience was independent women who have opinions and want to voice them. On the other hand we have to look at invoked audience, which is an audience that the writer imagines themselves writing for. In Bitch magazine the writers write about certain topics because they know their audience already and that is the independent woman. So the writers offer feelings that in their article that their reader should share. However, there use of language does not exclude anyone from reading this magazine, so they might be able to pull some more readers in . Both invoked and addressed audience need to work together because even though the text may be geared toward one type of audience, t may invoke a different type of audience as well. For example, Bitch magazine's addressed audience is independent women, but it's invoked audience is broader, since men are reading it also.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Audience Addressed/ Audience Invoked
Audience Addressed/Audience Invoked
Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford are trying to expand the understanding of the audience's role. They thought that is was difficult to define an audience to a reader or writer. Ede and Lunsford believed that there were two main viewpoints on audience in composition, audience addressed and audience invoked. An addressed audience is one that no matter how much feedback writers may get after writing something, the writers rely upon their own vision of the reader, which is something they create. Readers also create their image of writers based on their expectations and experiences. Mitchell and Taylor put a big emphasis on the audience and not as much on the writer, the audience had more control over evaluation and motivation than the writer. An invoked audience is something very different from an addressed audience. An invoked audience is a person or group of people usually that the writer creates. The writer imagines an audience and then puts them in roles that they are expected to respond to. This is difficult because the reader may not always respond to how the writer wants them to. In order for a writer to make his reader play his/her part, the writer needs to understand the needs and interests that their reader has. Defining audience in general is difficult because it isn't just about the intended, but for everyone who influences the writer.
Lisa Ede and Andrea Lunsford are trying to expand the understanding of the audience's role. They thought that is was difficult to define an audience to a reader or writer. Ede and Lunsford believed that there were two main viewpoints on audience in composition, audience addressed and audience invoked. An addressed audience is one that no matter how much feedback writers may get after writing something, the writers rely upon their own vision of the reader, which is something they create. Readers also create their image of writers based on their expectations and experiences. Mitchell and Taylor put a big emphasis on the audience and not as much on the writer, the audience had more control over evaluation and motivation than the writer. An invoked audience is something very different from an addressed audience. An invoked audience is a person or group of people usually that the writer creates. The writer imagines an audience and then puts them in roles that they are expected to respond to. This is difficult because the reader may not always respond to how the writer wants them to. In order for a writer to make his reader play his/her part, the writer needs to understand the needs and interests that their reader has. Defining audience in general is difficult because it isn't just about the intended, but for everyone who influences the writer.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Audience
The Writer's Audience Is Always a Fiction
Walter J. Ong wis writing about audience in this essay and the differences between the audience for the speaker and the audience for the writer. An audience for a speaker is in front of them and can offer feedback on the spot. A writers audience is something that the writer has to imagine. They are not certain who is going to be reading their work all the time so they have to fictionalize their audience like past successful writers.
A writer not only has the job of creating his or her audience they are supposed to involve them in the work. The writer has to catch the readers attention with imagery and scenery. They also have to form a connection with the reader so the reader will be interested enough to turn the page. Some writers will create many different characters in their story so it can give the reader someone to relate to. I have noticed that the books I read for enjoyment have a character that I can somehow relate to. Sometimes it is their characteristics, or sometimes I find characteristics in the characters that I desire for myself.
Creating an audience is a difficullt task, but it becomes more difficult when writers write letters or diaries. When an author writers a work they are writing for an audience, whereas when a writer writes a diary or letter, they can not appear that they writing for a specific audience. Diaries and letters are more personal, so that is what makes them harder, the writer has to find a way to write for an audience without making it obvious.
Walter J. Ong wis writing about audience in this essay and the differences between the audience for the speaker and the audience for the writer. An audience for a speaker is in front of them and can offer feedback on the spot. A writers audience is something that the writer has to imagine. They are not certain who is going to be reading their work all the time so they have to fictionalize their audience like past successful writers.
A writer not only has the job of creating his or her audience they are supposed to involve them in the work. The writer has to catch the readers attention with imagery and scenery. They also have to form a connection with the reader so the reader will be interested enough to turn the page. Some writers will create many different characters in their story so it can give the reader someone to relate to. I have noticed that the books I read for enjoyment have a character that I can somehow relate to. Sometimes it is their characteristics, or sometimes I find characteristics in the characters that I desire for myself.
Creating an audience is a difficullt task, but it becomes more difficult when writers write letters or diaries. When an author writers a work they are writing for an audience, whereas when a writer writes a diary or letter, they can not appear that they writing for a specific audience. Diaries and letters are more personal, so that is what makes them harder, the writer has to find a way to write for an audience without making it obvious.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
post-process pedagogy
Post-Process "Pedagogy"
Well let me first start off by saying that I found this article kind of difficult to read. I am not exactly sure if what I am going to say is really what the author intended, but hopefully I am not too off.
Breuch's article begins with saying how the process of composition which is prewriting, writing and rewriting is not sufficient when teaching the act of writing. Certain critics believe that this writing process is problematic because it is too general. They also believe that there is not one universal way to teach writing, but many ways. The author does not one post-process pedagogy that can be taught in the classrooms, but that the post -process theory offers insights to those who are teaching writing (pg 98). Breuch believes that the post-process theory makes people rethink of how they define writing as an activity but it is rather a body of knowledge. When it comes to post-process resistance the author states that Kent beleives that if "we consider writing as an indeterminate and interpretive activity...then writing and reading conceived broadly as process or bodies of knowledge-cannot be taught, for nothing exists to teach" (pg 99).
Kent doesn't think that writing is a system or process so it can not be taught. He does not think that teaching writing is impossible, but that teaching writing as a process is impossible. Irene Ward expands on Kent's ideas "to articulate a functional dialogism for writing pedagogy" (pg 103). She thinks that the student should have internal dialogues, as well as dialogues with their teacher. They should talk to other students and larger institutions. The students should talk about the subject. Breuch will argue that writing should be seen as more than a body of knowledge to be mastered. Post -process theorists depict the process as mastery suggesting that writing is a thing that can be practiced and conquered. Breuch does not think go along with the process as a formula but she does think like Petragalia that the post process scholarship is a rejection of formulaic framework. Breuch also says that writing is public and so it puts an emphasis on communicative interaction. So writing is an activity and interaction, rather then something that needs to be mastered. I for the most part have been taught that there are good and bad writers and the good writers are the people who have been able to master the technique of writing. As my education progressed I have found that not everyone who writes well has a secret technique that they mastered.
Well let me first start off by saying that I found this article kind of difficult to read. I am not exactly sure if what I am going to say is really what the author intended, but hopefully I am not too off.
Breuch's article begins with saying how the process of composition which is prewriting, writing and rewriting is not sufficient when teaching the act of writing. Certain critics believe that this writing process is problematic because it is too general. They also believe that there is not one universal way to teach writing, but many ways. The author does not one post-process pedagogy that can be taught in the classrooms, but that the post -process theory offers insights to those who are teaching writing (pg 98). Breuch believes that the post-process theory makes people rethink of how they define writing as an activity but it is rather a body of knowledge. When it comes to post-process resistance the author states that Kent beleives that if "we consider writing as an indeterminate and interpretive activity...then writing and reading conceived broadly as process or bodies of knowledge-cannot be taught, for nothing exists to teach" (pg 99).
Kent doesn't think that writing is a system or process so it can not be taught. He does not think that teaching writing is impossible, but that teaching writing as a process is impossible. Irene Ward expands on Kent's ideas "to articulate a functional dialogism for writing pedagogy" (pg 103). She thinks that the student should have internal dialogues, as well as dialogues with their teacher. They should talk to other students and larger institutions. The students should talk about the subject. Breuch will argue that writing should be seen as more than a body of knowledge to be mastered. Post -process theorists depict the process as mastery suggesting that writing is a thing that can be practiced and conquered. Breuch does not think go along with the process as a formula but she does think like Petragalia that the post process scholarship is a rejection of formulaic framework. Breuch also says that writing is public and so it puts an emphasis on communicative interaction. So writing is an activity and interaction, rather then something that needs to be mastered. I for the most part have been taught that there are good and bad writers and the good writers are the people who have been able to master the technique of writing. As my education progressed I have found that not everyone who writes well has a secret technique that they mastered.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Perl and Sommers
The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers
This paper is about a study of five unskilled college writers. The research had three questions. They wanted to find out how they write, can their process be analyzed, and what does if they can understand their process what does it say about how writing is taught in schools. They picked students who were unskilled in their writing and the some decided to participate in the study. They met with a researcher for five 90 minute sessions where the researcher took a nonactive role and the student wrote and talked out loud about how they were writing their papers. Three kinds of data was collected, students written products, their tapes of them composing and their responses to the interview. researchers wanted to find out movements within the composing process which are Standardized, Categorical, Concise, Structural and Diachronic. The method that they used made them code each composing behavior and chart them. The categorical divisions were talking, reading, and writing but all of these varied. The second thing they had to do was construct a time line and a numbering system. Through the charts they could tell things like how much time was spent on prewriting and what strategies were used. They found that people like Tony for example did prewrite, write and edit, but he did it all at once which stopped his writing process and made it more difficult. When he spoke out loud his ideas were clear and complete but they didn't make it onto the paper in the same way. When the students did their prewriting, they were given a few minutes and they tried to break down the topic into manageable parts , they would rephrase the topic until it connected with their experience, or they would try to find associations to a word in the topic. When they started this way, they were able to get a sense of where they wanted to go. When it came to writing, students would write then stop and reread and try to digest what they wrote. The students did produce flawed products but they do understand and in some ways preform some of the most important steps in writing. Editing is something that the students did, but grammar and stlye problems still remained in their final product. She states that unskilled writers are not beginners and teachers need to understand that. Teachers need to find the writing characteristics of their students and find what the problems are. When you're teaching composing you need to pay attention to the forms and products but also to the process.
Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers
Sommers believes that revision has been overlooked and that is because the writing process has directed it's attention away from revision. She states the Rohman's process of writing goes from prewriting to writing then to rewriting. Britton's model is conception, incubation and production. Both of these theories model themselves after speech and are linear. To linear methods revision is like and afterthought in talking. When talking there is no room for revision. Sommers found when looking at students and their revision process that they were not comfortable with word at all. Students had their own terminology, such as reviewing and redoing. Students look at revising as a way to find a different word and to cross out a word and put another in its place. Students have strategies to find different words but they lack the strategies to deal with the essay as a whole and find and correct a bigger problem. Experienced writers have said that they try to find the frame of their argument when they are revising. the experienced writers envision an audience when they are revising. Experienced writers understand the importance of resolving their dissonance in their writing.
Each of these authors do make valid points about writing. From my experience I understand that students do go into college not having a firm hold on writing in general but I have noticed that people do say things out loud that make sense but as soon as the pen hits the paper that idea is incomplete. So when Sommers says that revision is impossible in terms of speech I do not find necessarily true, from my own experiences with kids mostly is that when they say something out loud they are able to correct their mistakes in their writing. I however do feel that I did not have a clear concept on revision in high school because it was not about the paper as a whole, it was more about finding grammar problems and structure.
This paper is about a study of five unskilled college writers. The research had three questions. They wanted to find out how they write, can their process be analyzed, and what does if they can understand their process what does it say about how writing is taught in schools. They picked students who were unskilled in their writing and the some decided to participate in the study. They met with a researcher for five 90 minute sessions where the researcher took a nonactive role and the student wrote and talked out loud about how they were writing their papers. Three kinds of data was collected, students written products, their tapes of them composing and their responses to the interview. researchers wanted to find out movements within the composing process which are Standardized, Categorical, Concise, Structural and Diachronic. The method that they used made them code each composing behavior and chart them. The categorical divisions were talking, reading, and writing but all of these varied. The second thing they had to do was construct a time line and a numbering system. Through the charts they could tell things like how much time was spent on prewriting and what strategies were used. They found that people like Tony for example did prewrite, write and edit, but he did it all at once which stopped his writing process and made it more difficult. When he spoke out loud his ideas were clear and complete but they didn't make it onto the paper in the same way. When the students did their prewriting, they were given a few minutes and they tried to break down the topic into manageable parts , they would rephrase the topic until it connected with their experience, or they would try to find associations to a word in the topic. When they started this way, they were able to get a sense of where they wanted to go. When it came to writing, students would write then stop and reread and try to digest what they wrote. The students did produce flawed products but they do understand and in some ways preform some of the most important steps in writing. Editing is something that the students did, but grammar and stlye problems still remained in their final product. She states that unskilled writers are not beginners and teachers need to understand that. Teachers need to find the writing characteristics of their students and find what the problems are. When you're teaching composing you need to pay attention to the forms and products but also to the process.
Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers
Sommers believes that revision has been overlooked and that is because the writing process has directed it's attention away from revision. She states the Rohman's process of writing goes from prewriting to writing then to rewriting. Britton's model is conception, incubation and production. Both of these theories model themselves after speech and are linear. To linear methods revision is like and afterthought in talking. When talking there is no room for revision. Sommers found when looking at students and their revision process that they were not comfortable with word at all. Students had their own terminology, such as reviewing and redoing. Students look at revising as a way to find a different word and to cross out a word and put another in its place. Students have strategies to find different words but they lack the strategies to deal with the essay as a whole and find and correct a bigger problem. Experienced writers have said that they try to find the frame of their argument when they are revising. the experienced writers envision an audience when they are revising. Experienced writers understand the importance of resolving their dissonance in their writing.
Each of these authors do make valid points about writing. From my experience I understand that students do go into college not having a firm hold on writing in general but I have noticed that people do say things out loud that make sense but as soon as the pen hits the paper that idea is incomplete. So when Sommers says that revision is impossible in terms of speech I do not find necessarily true, from my own experiences with kids mostly is that when they say something out loud they are able to correct their mistakes in their writing. I however do feel that I did not have a clear concept on revision in high school because it was not about the paper as a whole, it was more about finding grammar problems and structure.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
cross talk
Preface to the Second Edition
The preface is just trying to tell the reader what to expect when reading this book. It is different from the first but he says that it is still very good. This book is supposed to be a historical artifact. It is a way to tack theoretical discussions. There are also other things that have changed, like the internet and software packages that enhance the research.
Preface to First Edition
Writing form you gut is not always the best way to write, especially for students since it can and does lead to theoretical contradictions. Writing was once used as a memory aid, but writing itself has not ever been that clear. Composition studies has divided itself, either they have to find our what writing is so they can teach it better, or to find the level to which it either removes or bestows power. Once you read this book, you are supposed to know who you like to read. You will also see opposing viewpoints and will be able to come to your own conclusions.
Teach Writing as a Process Not Product
This section basically deals with how tough writing is for a student and when a teacher rips apart his/her paper it can turn the student off to the entire process. The author David M. Murray gives a few guidelines when it comes to teaching writing. The teacher always has to keep in mind that the student is not going to hand in great literature so do not expect it, and they should encourage writing as a process. Students should examine their own writing; they should also find his/ her own subject to write on. Let the student use their own language and be allowed to write as many drafts as necessary. The students also need to be encouraged to try many types of writing so they can find the best way to express themselves. Mechanics of the paper should be the last thing to worry about. All papers should be examined to see what choices is the student making to see if they are progressing. Not every student learns at the same pace, some need more time than others, all writing is experimental there are never any absolutes.
Writing as a Mode of Learning
Janet Emig's argument for her essay is that writing is a "unique mode of learning" (pg 7). Writing as a product and process have a many attributes that help with certain learning strategies. Writing is a unique language process and the process is split into two orders. First is talking and listening which is not something that you need to be trained to do, and the second is reading and writing which you need some aid with at least initially. Writing is originating or creating a unique verbal construction. Reading is creating or re-creating a verbal construction that is graphically recorded. Listening is also creating or re-creating a verbal conversation that is not graphically recorded. There are some clear differences between talking and writing. Writing is learned and talking is natural . Talking is not an artificial process and writing is. Writing is a technological device and talking is organic. Writing is slower than most talking. Writing is stark and barren. Writing ends usually in a product whereas talking usually does not.
I have found that writing for me has always been a challenging process. It wasn't until recently I heard for the first time that your writing was never finished. When you wrote something down the first time, it was never really done your paper keeps evolving as you learn more and experience more in life.
The preface is just trying to tell the reader what to expect when reading this book. It is different from the first but he says that it is still very good. This book is supposed to be a historical artifact. It is a way to tack theoretical discussions. There are also other things that have changed, like the internet and software packages that enhance the research.
Preface to First Edition
Writing form you gut is not always the best way to write, especially for students since it can and does lead to theoretical contradictions. Writing was once used as a memory aid, but writing itself has not ever been that clear. Composition studies has divided itself, either they have to find our what writing is so they can teach it better, or to find the level to which it either removes or bestows power. Once you read this book, you are supposed to know who you like to read. You will also see opposing viewpoints and will be able to come to your own conclusions.
Teach Writing as a Process Not Product
This section basically deals with how tough writing is for a student and when a teacher rips apart his/her paper it can turn the student off to the entire process. The author David M. Murray gives a few guidelines when it comes to teaching writing. The teacher always has to keep in mind that the student is not going to hand in great literature so do not expect it, and they should encourage writing as a process. Students should examine their own writing; they should also find his/ her own subject to write on. Let the student use their own language and be allowed to write as many drafts as necessary. The students also need to be encouraged to try many types of writing so they can find the best way to express themselves. Mechanics of the paper should be the last thing to worry about. All papers should be examined to see what choices is the student making to see if they are progressing. Not every student learns at the same pace, some need more time than others, all writing is experimental there are never any absolutes.
Writing as a Mode of Learning
Janet Emig's argument for her essay is that writing is a "unique mode of learning" (pg 7). Writing as a product and process have a many attributes that help with certain learning strategies. Writing is a unique language process and the process is split into two orders. First is talking and listening which is not something that you need to be trained to do, and the second is reading and writing which you need some aid with at least initially. Writing is originating or creating a unique verbal construction. Reading is creating or re-creating a verbal construction that is graphically recorded. Listening is also creating or re-creating a verbal conversation that is not graphically recorded. There are some clear differences between talking and writing. Writing is learned and talking is natural . Talking is not an artificial process and writing is. Writing is a technological device and talking is organic. Writing is slower than most talking. Writing is stark and barren. Writing ends usually in a product whereas talking usually does not.
I have found that writing for me has always been a challenging process. It wasn't until recently I heard for the first time that your writing was never finished. When you wrote something down the first time, it was never really done your paper keeps evolving as you learn more and experience more in life.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
I think that the timeline tells us just how much writing instruction is influenced on what is going on in the society. As time went on the curriculum began to change to fit the needs of the people, especially those who were effected by the war. Education was used to not to make scholars but instead to make workers, people who would work hard to help the economy. Unfortunately only the wealthy were provided with education, but after some time passed that also began to change. More women and minorities began to go to school. Certain models of teaching brought about conflict, it was efficiency culture against liberal culture. Through the years the school system flopped from one culture to another and then back again. With changing times in society it called for changes in the school system. It was student based than subject based and back again. English had many different ways of being taught. It started with it being taught through literature. English was then about expressing oneself through creative writing. Then writing was thought of as a cognitive process after WWII. Communication courses became important once the military put it into their training. Cultures change and when they do so does the way they teach their future generations. The effeiceny model wanted to focus on making people leaders to help the nation.
The liberal model wanted to make the students successful for themselves.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
1960-1975
Economic, Social, Political Debates:
Government agencies and private corporations increased their efforts to bring education in the U.S in line with national economic and social policy. They tried to use schools as a way to cultivate human resources for the benefit of industrial and corporate leaders. A concern after the war was to have trained workers to serve economic growth of the nation as well as national security. Russia's launch of Sputnik challenged the U.S's technological dominance.
Changes in Methods, Curriculum and Students:
The education method that was in place was life adjustment, it was centered around the student. It was under attack at this time by conservative critics of the schools. they felt that the schools weren't providing the proper education to create experts that were needed for a strong economy. They also believed that public schools should be subject based focusing on scientific and scholarly disciplines. In 1958 the National Defense Act wanted to improve schools math and science curriculum; and in 1964 literature, language and composition were included. The Process of Education became an account of the new spiral curriculum. This plan organized the curriculum around an academic discipline which would be presented to the students according to their level of cognitive development. Burner also thought that students should take an active role in learning by actually doing the literary criticism, math and not relying on experts. James Moffet wrote Teaching the Universe of Discourse and it had a series of activities to correspond with four developmental stages of students from elementary to high school. interior dialogue, conversation, correspondence and public narrative were the four stages. There was a lot of emphasis on the cognitive version of the composing process but it was not the only alternative, a related paradigm was endorsed by Dartmouth Conference in 1966. In this conference Britain told the U.S teachers that their emphasis was not on the subject matter, but on providing an experience which the kids can experiment and test while strengthening their linguistic and intellectual skills by using them in different contexts. The method of writing that's prosued in a supportive environment and are engaged in self discovery has been a method that has faded but was never completely gone.
Government agencies and private corporations increased their efforts to bring education in the U.S in line with national economic and social policy. They tried to use schools as a way to cultivate human resources for the benefit of industrial and corporate leaders. A concern after the war was to have trained workers to serve economic growth of the nation as well as national security. Russia's launch of Sputnik challenged the U.S's technological dominance.
Changes in Methods, Curriculum and Students:
The education method that was in place was life adjustment, it was centered around the student. It was under attack at this time by conservative critics of the schools. they felt that the schools weren't providing the proper education to create experts that were needed for a strong economy. They also believed that public schools should be subject based focusing on scientific and scholarly disciplines. In 1958 the National Defense Act wanted to improve schools math and science curriculum; and in 1964 literature, language and composition were included. The Process of Education became an account of the new spiral curriculum. This plan organized the curriculum around an academic discipline which would be presented to the students according to their level of cognitive development. Burner also thought that students should take an active role in learning by actually doing the literary criticism, math and not relying on experts. James Moffet wrote Teaching the Universe of Discourse and it had a series of activities to correspond with four developmental stages of students from elementary to high school. interior dialogue, conversation, correspondence and public narrative were the four stages. There was a lot of emphasis on the cognitive version of the composing process but it was not the only alternative, a related paradigm was endorsed by Dartmouth Conference in 1966. In this conference Britain told the U.S teachers that their emphasis was not on the subject matter, but on providing an experience which the kids can experiment and test while strengthening their linguistic and intellectual skills by using them in different contexts. The method of writing that's prosued in a supportive environment and are engaged in self discovery has been a method that has faded but was never completely gone.
Thursday, September 6, 2007
They Say, I Say
Crystal
I think that tutors can use some of the strategies that Graff and Birkenstein use when tutoring. They can learn what process the writer goes through while writing a paper. A tutor can converse with them about their paper and they can explain some of the things they have written. Through metacommentary the writer can tell the reader or tutor in this case how to think about what they wrote and how not to think about their major points in their paper.
I do not think that their method is not clearly based on templates. When using any of their methods I believe that you as the tutor can put your own twist on things. Depending on the person your tutoring you have to approach them a certain way. You can not deal with different people in the exact same way, when writing the same thing applies. A tutor has to keep their audience in mind.
I think that there are a lot of important moves to keep in mind when having a tutoring conference. I think that having the student talk about their writing and what they want their reader to thin about their writing will help not only the tutor but the writer as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)