I like this model of the writing process . . . it's not very linear and shows more of an interactive relationship between the different steps.
It has been almost eight years since I left the classroom to stay home and rear my children. While those years seemed to pass in an instant, as I've begun the process of transitioning back into student/teacher/professional mode, I've realized how much education has changed. Not necessarily for the better either.
As I read through the readings today, I tried to think about whether or not I taught composition or writing--as I think there is a difference. Using the model of the writing process, I had all my seventh graders brainstorming, prewriting, drafting, editing, and publishing. Most of my students were comfortable with this linear process . . . or perhaps they were resigned to it, being taught to write that way for most of their fairly short academic lives. Yet there were students who had trouble with the process. Hesitant to "go against the flow," I often tried to get them to go through the writing process and often found myself dissapointed with the results.
I believe in modeling for students, so when they wrote, I wrote. And I found myself, at times, uncomfortable with the knowledge that I myself felt constricted and frustrated with the writing process. Doing most of my writing directly on a PC, I was content to dive in and write my draft, editing as I went and doing multiple drafts on the computer. I often skipped the prewriting and brainstorming because it didn't serve me well. I'm sure it was lack of experience and confidence in myself that didn't allow my students the same privelege.
Only once can I remember encouraging students not to follow the process. So many of them were having trouble writing introductory paragraphs--they were finding that as they'd write through their piece, it would turn into something totally different by the end. I don't like writing introductions either, so I suggested to them to just dive in and write--come back and do the introduction last. They were stunned that I would tell them to do so, and it was a technique that helped quite a few of them as they stared at the page, struggling with the introduction.
Maybe the writer's block was necessarily caused by the evil pencils but by a linear process that doesn't always work with non-linear writers?
I thought of this after reading Steven Lynn's thoughts on Process when he quotes Peter Elbow in Writing without Teachers: "Only at the end will you know what you want to say or the words you want to say it with."
I like the idea of a more cyclical rather than linear writing process. Lynn mentions the importance of constant revision and holding off grading . . . not always practical in the modern classroom but a worthy goal. Before, I graded students at the "end" of the process--their final draft. Yet that clashed with what I always told them, that writers aren't ever really done writing . . . often, there is always something they can find that they can improve or change or expand on. Going back, I'm wondering if a compromise would be to allow students to further revise their "final" copy and hand it back in for another grade (within a certain time frame).
In his introduction to The Making of Knowledge in Composition, Stephen North quotes Paul Dessing on his approach to teaching writing, "Anyone who discusses method must eventually face the question of what his method is." I think it's crucial for me to be aware that not all of my students are going to have the same method . . . . and that by offering a more cyclical or personally modified writing process, I may make writing more inspiring and approachable to students.
I always tell my students that writers are constantly editing and never truly finished with their work. I remember one of my previous principals telling all the teachers during a faculty meeting that if a student does not do well on a test or assignment, we should be willing to let them take it again (same exact thing) and give them the best grade of the two. His idea was that we as educators should want our students to have as many opportunities as necessary to get it right. Part of me agrees with this idea so that students really learn, but on the other hand, why do we as teachers provide time in class to review writing, teach mini lessons on writing development, and provide rubrics that specifically state all the student needs to know about a particular assignment. I am truly torn. I know there are some students out there who need more help. I personally teach individuals to take their work to the next level. But I agree that there should be a benefit to editing, revising, and continuing the process. Is there a better way to promote these skills without linking them to "new/other grades" after a second completion?
ReplyDeleteI too routinely look for ways to demystify the writing process for my students, in the hope that they will realize that so much of what they read did not just magically appear on paper in that final form, and therefore, they will then give themselves the permission they need to "fail" in their first attempts. In other words, we need to share with them our lousy first drafts. We need to let them know that even when we, their teachers, the great proponents of "good writing" write, the first word we put down on that blank piece of paper are often a mess. I will often tell them how terrible my first drafts are, and some will believe me, but others need to see to believe. Often what I'll do when writing the dreaded thesis statement for specific essays, I will ask students for a list of a few points they want to cover, and then, on the board - as I think out loud, in front of all - they will watch me stumble over words, cross out, rewrite, and finally create a semi-decent thesis statement after much trial and error. This works even more effectively with full paragraphs. I can sense it helps many, but you, the teacher, have to have the guts to write poorly in front of your class - as we all often do in private.
ReplyDelete