(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.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I thought you had a good, thorough summary of the article. I wonder if Flower and Hayes think this cognitive process A: can be taught and B: is for all skill levels of writers. I understand and believe the cognitive model sounds ideal and will promote development. I also think that not only for unskilled writers, but sometimes writers need structure (at least at first) because as Flowers and Hayes say, every writer is different.
Good questions, Lindsay!
Can the cognitive process model be taught? Flower suggests in her 1998 textbook that "writers engaged in a literate act need to be aware of a repertoire of strategies" and "that level of conscious awareness of his or her own strategies, assumptions, and thinking. . . opens the door to critical awareness and conscious choice" (_Problem Solving Strategies for College and Community_, vi). In other words, yes, writing can be taught--not as a "product," but as a reflective practice.
Yes, I think F&H believe that the cognitive process model applies to writers at every skill level, although not all writers will engage in the same kinds of processes. Some strategies for framing the task or setting goals, for example, may be more effective than others.
Crystal's original post seemed to back up David Bartholomae's claim that the cognitive process model places invention and discovery OUTSIDE of the act of writing: Crystal said: "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." For Friday, I'll ask you to consider how the cognitive sub-processes of planning and translating differ from Bartholomae's model of invention (as in "INVENTING the university.")
Again, thanks for your good thinking!
Post a Comment