I really enjoyed reading this week’s chapter. It was insightful and a great summarization of all the modern and postmodern theories. I really enjoyed this week’s reading because Peter Elbow made a return and I better valued his ideas of growing and cooking.
While reading the first few pages of this chapter which discuss the bottom-up approach and how to grade papers, my mind immediately flew to Peter Elbow’s text. Elbow believed that everyone could write but that schools, through the use of grammatical instruction and unrealistic writing assignments, had caused generations of students to despise writing. Thus, many choose careers in either math or the sciences since those fields and jobs did not solely focus on writing (Williams 47). In Writing Without Teachers, Elbow writes that “We suffer from such a basic misconception about the process of writing that we are as bad off as the people in the parable [about the island of people who couldn’t bend their knees]” (Elbow 14). Williams and Elbow seem to both agree that all are able to be writers. We just have to break free from the longstanding stigmas that for many have killed a love of writing.
A quote on page forty-five really intrigued me. Williams writes that “Thus, by focusing on bits and pieces of writing-sentences, paragraphs, and grammar-the current-traditionalist approach ignores most of what writing is about.”(45). Williams quote reminded me why there is a major fear issue associated with writing. As teachers and potential teachers, we see through our correspondence with our first year college students how fear can be a real obstacle to writing. Elbow states that this fear “is partly because of schooling makes us obsessed with the ‘mistakes’ we make in writing. Many people are constantly thinking about spelling and grammar as they try to write. I am always thinking about the awkwardness, wordiness, and general mushiness of my natural verbal product as I try to write down words” (Elbow 5). Indeed, many of our students reported that they were worried about either showing or sharing their paper with their peers. Even when we did our peer review of our literary narratives, many people shared how they were nervous or uncomfortable. The reason why we and our students got nervous about sharing our work with others is simple. For too long, we have been trained, through the use of red pencil marks, symbols like awk, class labels (general vs. AP) and teacher comments (see me after class to discuss alternative project, your work is poor, where was your mind, etc.) to see ourselves as poor writers who make “simple, basic or remedial” mistakes and really are “barbarians pouring through the gates of academe” in the hope of “becoming civilized” (Williams 50). Thanks to the Harvard Influence, writing has continued to be feared because people are constantly told how flawed they are. Thus, many students will only see themselves as writers when they get the “A” otherwise, they will believe that they have failed.
However, it is the system that is flawed. Williams writes that “Moreover, telling students about the structural features of writing has little, if any, effect on writing skills because as soon as students actually start composing, they are quite naturally focus on intention and meaning” (Williams 45). Elbow agrees stating that
“Think of writing then not as a way to transmit a message but as a way to grow and cook a message. Writing is a way to end up thinking something you couldn’t have started out thinking. Writing is, in fact, a transaction with words whereby you free yourself from what you presently think, feel and perceive…it’s the best way you can work up to what you really want to say”(Elbow15).
Hence, freewriting exercises are valuable because they allow the student to get more comfortable with writing and it teaches them to stop editing while writing. More importantly, it allows the student to explore issues x, y and z and to fully allow them to be examined. Williams in his section on New Rhetoric and Process writes that “Students are encouraged to focus first on what they want to say rather than on how they want to say it” (Williams 53). Thus, students can focus on writing for writing sake (cooking) and then work on revising their draft (growing). Elbow had dreamed that one day students would first write than edit instead of doing both at the same time. Peter Elbow writes that “Editing, in itself, is not the problem… is usually necessary if we want to end up with something satisfactory. The problem is that editing goes on at the same time as producing…It’s an unnecessary burden to try to think of words and also worry at the same time whether they’re the right words” (Elbow 5). Thus, one is able to see that Elbow’s theory of growing and cooking really were resourceful and practical, while the Harvard Influence educational process focused on a once and done principle that created a fear of (and sense of helplessness in) writing in students for years.
I really loved this chapter and I apologize for the length of this blog. There was some great food for thought in this chapter and it definitely helped my understanding of Elbow’s text. Elbow was championing for students to end their long held fears of writing and to really allow their voice to be known, claimed and heard. Williams in this chapter outlines how the various theories have both positively and negatively affected writing. Cannot wait to talk about this chapter on Thrusday!!!!One question: Is blogging a present day example of romantic rhetoric?
No comments:
Post a Comment