Writing about Writing

Last updated

Writing about Writing (WAW) is a method or theory of teaching composition that emphasizes writing studies research. Writing about Writing approaches to first-year composition take a variety of forms, [1] typically based on the rationale that students benefit when engaging the "declarative and procedural knowledge" associated with writing studies research. [2]

Contents

History

Composition is not widely recognized as its own discipline. Composition instructors strive to teach students how to become better writers. As public perception often shapes public policy, this uninformed view of composition as a legitimate field of study has contributed to a lack of funding and emphasis on composition classes in academia. [3]

"Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions"

In 2007, Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle published an article titled "Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions" in which they propose a reform of first-year composition instruction based on the results of a test course they developed. This course sought "to improve students' understanding of writing, rhetoric, language, and literacy" and promoted a view of reading and writing as scholarly inquiry, encouraging "more realistic conceptions of writing." [4] The article is considered to be revolutionary by other scholars in the field, and it is frequently cited by those who have continued the work in developing WAW approaches.

In the article, Downs and Wardle deny the existence of a universal educated discourse, which conflicts with first-year composition goals of preparing students to write across the curriculum. Downs and Wardle write that teaching students how to write across the curriculum supports the idea that "writing is not a real subject, that writing courses do not require expert instructors, and that rhetoric and composition are not genuine research areas or legitimate intellectual pursuits." [4]

The article goes on to outline the course they designed that is centered more on teaching the students about "writing studies", rather than how to write in college. The authors discuss readers, research assignments, reflective assignments and presentation assignments before going on to report case-studies of two students who took Downs' and Wardle's WAW-centered first-year composition course. While these were different types of students who had different learning outcomes, both stories illustrate the flexible nature of WAW and how this type of course can be tailored towards individual student needs. The authors discuss several benefits they observed of using WAW to teach first-year composition, but also indicate the presence of challenges associated with teaching this kind of course, and address both these challenges as well as critiques they received from colleagues.

The authors conclude that an implementation of WAW-centered classes in first-year composition professionalizes writing instruction, and raises awareness about writing studies as a legitimate discipline. Downs and Wardle write "rather than purporting to teach students 'academic writing' and claiming to prepare them for writing in their disciplines, the course teaches students what we as a field have learned about writing as an object of study." [4] Essentially, the aim of a WAW course is for students to discover how writing is governed by its audience, purpose and context.

"Continuing the Dialogue"

After its publication, the article caused a stir in academia and received a lot of response from the community, prompting a follow-up article by Wardle in 2008 titled "Continuing the Dialogue: Follow-up Comments on 'Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions.'" In it, Wardle addresses responders who commented that she and Downs put too much emphasis on first-year composition within the field by explaining that first-year composition should not hold more value than other branches within their field, but it is of importance and merits scholarly inquiry. She reaffirms their main point as being "that we should reconceive the nature of FYC goals and focus on the content knowledge we have as a field from which students can benefit." [5] She goes on to write, "Let me be as clear as possible: Doug and I are arguing that composition instructors should refuse to separate knowledge about writing from practice in writing and some instruction on how to complete the writing tasks at hand." [5] Another misconception she addresses is misconstruing a first-year writing WAW approach as being the same as an introductory course to a writing major and dismisses the claims that a WAW approach is put in place to recruit writing majors. The differences between these two courses, she explains, are both audience and purpose. Downs and Wardle expanded have produced an accompanying textbook, Writing about Writing: A College Reader, which was published in 2011.

Benefits

In "Teaching About Writing, Righting Misconceptions," Downs and Wardle discuss several benefits they found WAW affords students including: [4]

WAW asks students to read about writing and various processes, which allows them to identify what works for them. By reading articles that a composition studies student might read, the first-year composition student is able to gain further insight into the ongoing conversation centered around writing. In her article "Writing about Writing in Basic Writing," Shannon Carter explains "a writing-about-writing approach foregrounds research in writing and related studies by asking students to read and discuss key research in the discipline and contribute to the scholarly conversation themselves." [3] She explains that having students immerse themselves in this type of scholarship will not only improve their writing but their understanding of writing as an academic discipline will increase as well, which in turn contributes to changing the public perception that writing is only something that is a piece of other disciplines.

Many instructors who use WAW are also benefited in that they themselves are able to learn more about composition studies along with their class, promoting parallel learning. In an article titled "Seeing is Believing: Writing Studies with 'Basic Writing' Students," Charlton reports that some see value in teaching first-year composition from a cultural studies approach because not only does this allow for composition instructors to teach what they love, but the types of reading promote critical thinking and analysis—two goals many first-year composition courses have. Also, the article reports on several instructors incorporating graduate level writing-studies readings into their first-year writing courses with much success. Charlton writes, "Students were engaged and were developing research questions and projects that rivaled my on senior-level composition theory class, both in terms of complexity and overall quality of finished products." [6]

Criticism and responses

As WAW is a relatively recent movement and is still in its early stages of development, proponents do not always agree on how WAW should be applied to the classroom. Carter points out instructors only account for a small portion of the composition community, and therefore disagreement is common and "often in fundamental ways." [3]

In his response to Downs and Wardle's "Teaching About Writing, Righting Misconceptions," Joshua P. Kutney argues that providing students with an awareness of writing through WAW will not necessarily transfer to their writing performance. He compares WAW to students who take courses that raise their awareness of social problems. While students gain a greater sense of these issues through these courses, rarely do they display behavioral changes in regards to these issues.

Kutney also argues that an increased awareness of writing studies may result in students becoming more comfortable with validating their insufficiencies as a writer because they now recognize the difficulties expert writers have, and not because they now comprehend "the nuances of the composing process." He goes on to say that while Downs and Wardle discuss WAW as allowing students to see academic writing as engaging in an ongoing conversation, this knowledge might overwhelm the student and cause them to avoid engaging in the conversation altogether. Kutney writes, "While First-Year Composition may not do much to develop the writing abilities of students, Downs and Wardle offer no reason to think that Introduction to Writing Studies, a course that does not purport to teach writing, will do more." [7]

In their response to Downs and Wardle, Miles et al. claim a WAW approach seems like it serves as an introduction to a writing major, which would not be beneficial to first-year students. They take issue with Downs and Wardle's "dismissal of the importance of teaching situated procedural knowledge", [8] most notably the rhetorical situation. Miles et al. claim the only rhetorical situation a WAW course exposes its students to is that of scholarly research. They also argue that Downs and Wardle put too much emphasis on first-year composition within the field of writing studies, seeing it as the predominant branch of the field. They also argue that Downs and Wardle fail to give voice to the students in their case study who did not benefit from the WAW approach and that only those who did are highlighted. Another main criticism they have is WAW's reliance on one modality of research writing while they argue that their "research and scholarship is an interesting hybrid of several modalities at once." [8]

Downs published a response to Miles et al. in which he expresses displeasure at the arguments the authors laid out:

My first reaction to Miles et al.'s response to "FYC as Intro to Writing Studies" is about as magnanimous as their response itself – that is, not remotely. This disappoints me, because I do maintain the ideal of scholarship wherein a constructive dialectic stretches, shapes, and builds ideas rather than merely tearing them down. I confess my first instinct is to tear down Miles et al.'s response as they attempt to tear down the construct we forwarded. (Earning the condemnation of an entire department is bracing-and ironic when the scholarship of some of the signatories – for me, Schwegler and Shamoon – planted seeds of ideas they find unworkable. [9]

He writes Miles et al. "seem to address us as if we are sitting at the kids' table at Thanksgiving dinner." His main contentions are: [9]

He concludes by writing "I am grateful not only for the opportunity to respond, but to have something to respond to. And I wonder how differently our students might understand writing if they had similar opportunities." [9]

A response to Downs' response to Miles et al. by Slomp and Sargent does not reject Downs and Wardle's ideas in the same way Miles et al. does, but calls for more research on the WAW method. The authors also argue that Downs and Wardle fail to position themselves into an ongoing conversation in the same way they advocate for in WAW. Slomp and Sargent say that Downs and Wardle paint themselves to be "lone pioneers" in this venture, but in the 1990s Wendy Bishop supported the use of writing as the main subject in the writing classroom. They also reference Peter Elbow as being someone who touched on similar ideas to WAW long before Downs and Wardle published "Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions." [10]

Shannon Carter, while a proponent of WAW, describes how it is not always accessible to other instructors or policy makers. She describes how WAW can be "off-putting" to others, and the scholarship on the subject cannot be relied on in making changes to composition curriculum. She explains that while WAW can be effective for some, it is simply one way to approach teaching composition and will not work with everyone's teaching style. [3]

As previously mentioned, many believe that because the readings are written by professionals for professionals, undergraduates will not be able to easily understand the concepts, which will negatively affect engagement with the course. Some even question Downs and Wardle's motives, and see WAW as a ploy in "recruiting" more students to become majors in the field. [6]

Writing about Writing: A College Reader

Published in 2011, Downs and Wardle's book is described as "encouraging students to draw on what they know in order to contribute to ongoing conversations about writing and literacy." [11] In the preface for the instructors, Downs and Wardle describes their frustration with composition courses that are based around themes that have nothing to do with writing. They list several reasons as to why WAW is a "smart choice" in terms of an approach to teaching first-year composition: [12]

The book addresses several questions geared towards helping the student understand multiple components of writing: Why study writing? How do readers read and writers write? How do you write? How have you become the readers and writer you are today? How do communities shape writing? How do you make yourself heard as college writer? A mixture of selected readings from both scholars, authors, and students are provided, as well as various activities and discussion questions associated with the readings. [12]

Selected readings

Below are some of the readings included in Writing about Writing: A College Reader:

Reception

The book is praised for its accessibility and forward thinking. For instance, David R. Russell from Iowa State University called the book "a milestone in composition textbooks." [11] Russell is known for his work in Writing Across the Curriculum and activity theory.

Its publisher's website describes it by saying "Throughout the book, friendly explanations and scaffolded questions help students connect to readings and — even more important — develop knowledge about writing they can use at work, in their everyday lives, and in college." [11]

Further reading

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Active learning</span> Educational technique

Active learning is "a method of learning in which students are actively or experientially involved in the learning process and where there are different levels of active learning, depending on student involvement." Bonwell & Eison (1991) states that "students participate [in active learning] when they are doing something besides passively listening." According to Hanson and Moser (2003) using active teaching techniques in the classroom can create better academic outcomes for students. Scheyvens, Griffin, Jocoy, Liu, & Bradford (2008) further noted that "by utilizing learning strategies that can include small-group work, role-play and simulations, data collection and analysis, active learning is purported to increase student interest and motivation and to build students ‘critical thinking, problem-solving and social skills". In a report from the Association for the Study of Higher Education, authors discuss a variety of methodologies for promoting active learning. They cite literature that indicates students must do more than just listen in order to learn. They must read, write, discuss, and be engaged in solving problems. This process relates to the three learning domains referred to as knowledge, skills and attitudes (KSA). This taxonomy of learning behaviors can be thought of as "the goals of the learning process." In particular, students must engage in such higher-order thinking tasks as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Writer's block</span> Condition in which an author experiences creative slowdown

Writer's block is a non-medical condition, primarily associated with writing, in which an author is either unable to produce new work or experiences a creative slowdown.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Second language writing</span>

Second language writing is the study of writing performed by non-native speakers/writers of a language as a second or foreign language. According to Oxford University, second language writing is the expression of one's actions and what one wants to say in writing in a language other than one's native language. Learning a new language and writing in it is the most challenging thing. Learning a new language first requires an understanding of the writing system and the grammar of the language. Because grammar is the basis of writing. Learning the grammar of a language is the only way to write in that language. The extent to which non-native speakers write in formal or specialized domains, and the requirements for grammatical accuracy and compositional coherence, will vary according to the specific context. The process of second language writing has been an area of research in applied linguistics and second language acquisition theory since the middle of the 20th century. The focus has been mainly on second-language writing in academic settings. In the last few years, there has been a great deal of interest in and research on informal writing. These informal writings include writing in online contexts. In terms of instructional practices, the focus of second language writing instruction has traditionally been on achieving grammatical accuracy. However, this changed under the influence of compositional studies, which focused on conceptual and structural properties. Another development in the teaching of second language writing is the increasing use of models and the emphasis on the properties of particular writing genres. Recent research has analyzed how second-language writing differs from native-language writing, emphasizing the cultural factors that influence second-language writers. In general, second language acquisition research has transitioned from a primary focus on cognitive factors to a sociocultural perspective in which writing is viewed not only as an acquired language skill and cognitive ability but also, more broadly, as a socially situated communicative act involving a target audience. Recently, particular attention has been paid to the integration of written texts with other media (multimodality) and to the mixing of languages in online media.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Composition studies</span>

Composition studies is the professional field of writing, research, and instruction, focusing especially on writing at the college level in the United States.

The audio-lingual method or Army Method is a method used in teaching foreign languages. It is based on behaviorist theory, which postulates that certain traits of living things, and in this case humans, could be trained through a system of reinforcement. The correct use of a trait would receive positive feedback while incorrect use of that trait would receive negative feedback.

Advanced Placement (AP) English Language and Composition is a course and examination offered by the College Board as part of the Advanced Placement Program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scientific misconceptions</span> False beliefs about science

Scientific misconceptions are commonly held beliefs about science that have no basis in actual scientific fact. Scientific misconceptions can also refer to preconceived notions based on religious and/or cultural influences. Many scientific misconceptions occur because of faulty teaching styles and the sometimes distancing nature of true scientific texts. Because students' prior knowledge and misconceptions are important factors for learning science, science teachers should be able to identify and address these conceptions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First-year composition</span> Introductory core curriculum writing course in US colleges and universities

First-year composition is an introductory core curriculum writing course in US colleges and universities. This course focuses on improving students' abilities to write in a university setting and introduces students to writing practices in the disciplines and professions. These courses are traditionally required of incoming students, thus the previous name, "Freshman Composition." Scholars working within the field of composition studies often have teaching first-year composition (FYC) courses as the practical focus of their scholarly work.

The process theory of composition is a field of composition studies that focuses on writing as a process rather than a product. Based on Janet Emig's breakdown of the writing process, the process is centered on the idea that students determine the content of the course by exploring the craft of writing using their own interests, language, techniques, voice, and freedom, and where students learn what people respond to and what they don't. Classroom activities often include peer work where students themselves are teaching, reviewing, brainstorming, and editing.

Feminist theory in composition studies examines how gender, language, and cultural studies affect the teaching and practice of writing. It challenges the traditional assumptions and methods of composition studies and proposes alternative approaches that are informed by feminist perspectives. Feminist theory in composition studies covers a range of topics, such as the history and development of women’s writing, the role of gender in rhetorical situations, the representation and identity of writers, and the pedagogical implications of feminist theory for writing instruction. Feminist theory in composition studies also explores how writing can be used as a tool for empowerment, resistance, and social change. Feminist theory in composition studies emerged in the late 1960s and early 1970s as a response to the male-dominated field of composition and rhetoric. It has been influenced by various feminist movements and disciplines, such as second-wave feminism, poststructuralism, psychoanalysis, critical race theory, and queer theory. Feminist theory in composition studies has contributed to the revision of traditional rhetorical concepts, the recognition of diverse voices and genres, the promotion of collaborative and ethical communication, and the integration of personal and political issues in writing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Reflective writing</span> Analytical practice used in scholarship and education

Reflective writing is an analytical practice in which the writer describes a real or imaginary scene, event, interaction, passing thought, or memory and adds a personal reflection on its meaning. Many reflective writers keep in mind questions such as "What did I notice?", "How has this changed me?" or "What might I have done differently?" when reflecting.

Writing across the curriculum (WAC) is a movement within contemporary composition studies that concerns itself with writing in classes beyond composition, literature, and other English courses. According to a comprehensive survey performed in 2006–2007, approximately half of American institutes of higher learning have something that can be identified as a WAC program. In 2010, Thaiss and Porter defined WAC as "a program or initiative used to 'assist teachers across disciplines in using student writing as an instructional tool in their teaching'". WAC, then, is a programmatic effort to introduce multiple instructional uses of writing beyond assessment. WAC has also been part of the student-centered pedagogies movement seeking to replace teaching via one-way transmission of knowledge from teacher to student with more interactive strategies that enable students to interact with and participate in creating knowledge in the classroom.

Peer feedback is a practice where feedback is given by one student to another. Peer feedback provides students opportunities to learn from each other. After students finish a writing assignment but before the assignment is handed in to the instructor for a grade, the students have to work together to check each other's work and give comments to the peer partner. Comments from peers are called as peer feedback. Peer feedback can be in the form of corrections, opinions, suggestions, or ideas to each other. Ideally, peer feedback is a two-way process in which one cooperates with the other.

Efforts to teach writing in the United States at a national scale using methods other than direct teacher–student tutorial were first implemented in the 19th century. The positive association between students' development of the ability to use writing to refine and synthesize their thinking and their performance in other disciplines is well-documented.

Revision is a process in writing of rearranging, adding, or removing paragraphs, sentences, or words. Writers may revise their writing after a draft is complete or during the composing process. Revision involves many of the strategies known generally as editing but also can entail larger conceptual shifts of purpose and audience as well as content. Within the writing process, revision comes once one has written a draft to work with, so that one can re-see and improve it, iteratively. Working at both deeper and more surface levels a writer can increase the power of the text.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rhetorical situation</span> Context of a rhetorical event

The rhetorical situation is an event that consists of an issue, an audience, and a set of constraints. A rhetorical situation arises from a given context or exigence. An article by Lloyd Bitzer introduced the model of the rhetorical situation in 1968, which was later challenged and modified by Richard E. Vatz (1973) and Scott Consigny (1974). More recent scholarship has further redefined the model to include more expansive views of rhetorical operations and ecologies.

A dialogue journal is an ongoing written interaction between two people to exchange experiences, ideas, knowledge or reflections. It is used most often in education as a means of sustained written interaction between students and teachers at all education levels. It can be used to promote second language learning and learning in all areas.

Collaborative pedagogy stems from the process theory of rhetoric and composition. Collaborative pedagogy believes that students will better engage with writing, critical thinking, and revision if they engage with others. Collaborative pedagogy pushes back against the Current-Traditional model of writing, as well as other earlier theories explaining rhetoric and composition; earlier theories of writing, especially current-traditional, emphasizes writing as a final product. In contrast, collaborative pedagogy rejects the notion that students think, learn, and write in isolation. Collaborative pedagogy strives to maximize critical thinking, learning, and writing skills through interaction and interpersonal engagement. Collaborative pedagogy also connects to the broader theory of collaborative learning, which encompasses other disciplines including, but not limited to, education, psychology, and sociology.

Writing assessment refers to an area of study that contains theories and practices that guide the evaluation of a writer's performance or potential through a writing task. Writing assessment can be considered a combination of scholarship from composition studies and measurement theory within educational assessment. Writing assessment can also refer to the technologies and practices used to evaluate student writing and learning. An important consequence of writing assessment is that the type and manner of assessment may impact writing instruction, with consequences for the character and quality of that instruction.

Disengagement compact is the name assigned by educator George Kuh in 1991 to the tacit agreement between college teachers and their students that if teachers will minimize academic demands and grade generously, students for their part will write favorable course reviews and will allow teachers undisturbed time to focus on the research and publishing that their institutions reward with promotions and tenure. Commentators in the United States and Canada attribute the disengagement compact to market forces acting since the 1960s. The disengagement compact has been most discussed — and lamented — by educators convinced that engagement with teachers builds student competence in critical thinking, analytical reasoning, problem solving, and writing. Kuh maintains that the disengagement compact diminishes not only the skills acquisitions closely associated with academic learning but also the students' personal growth that teachers historically had helped to advance by engaging with students outside the classroom as well as inside. Beginning in 2000, educator and author Murray Sperber brought the disengagement compact to the attention of the general reading public, emphasizing its upsurge in large research universities.

References

  1. ↑ Downs, Doug & Wardle, Elizabeth. (2012). Reimagining the nature of FYC: Trends in writing-about-writing pedagogies. 10.2307/j.ctt4cgjsj.11.
  2. ↑ "CF 27: Reflecting Back and Looking Forward by Elizabeth Wardle and Doug Downs". compositionforum.com. Retrieved 2019-07-27.
  3. 1 2 3 4 Carter, Shannon (2010) [2009]. "Writing about Writing in Basic Writing: A Teacher/Researcher/Activist Narrative". Basic Writing e-Journal. 8–9.
  4. 1 2 3 4 Downs, Douglas; Elizabeth Wardle (2007). "Teaching About Writing, Righting Misconceptions: (Re)Envisioning 'First Year Composition' as 'Introduction to Writing Studies']". College Composition and Communication. 58 (4): 552–584.
  5. 1 2 Wardle, Elizabeth (2008). "Continuing the Dialogue: Follow-up Comments on 'Teaching About Writing, Righting Misconceptions'". College Composition and Communication. 60 (1): 175–181.
  6. 1 2 Charlton, Jonkka (2012) [2009]. "Seeing is Believing: Writing Studies with 'Basic Writing' Students". Basic Writing Online. 8/9.
  7. ↑ Kutney, Joshua P. (2007). "Will Writing Awareness Transfer to Writing Performance? Response to Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle, 'Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions'". College Composition and Communication. 59 (10): 276–279.
  8. 1 2 Miles, Libby; et al. (2008). "Interchanges: Commenting on Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle's 'Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions'". College Composition and Communication. 59 (3): 503–511.
  9. 1 2 3 Downs, Douglas (2008). "Response to Miles et al". College Composition and Communication. 60 (1): 175–181.
  10. ↑ Slomp, David H.; M. Elizabeth Sargent (2009). "Responses to Responses: Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle's 'Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions'". College Composition and Communication. 60 (1): 171–175.
  11. 1 2 3 Bedford St. Martin's, Writing about Writing 10 February 2012.
  12. 1 2 Downs, Douglas; Elizabeth Wardle (2011). Writing about Writing: A College Reader. New York: Bedford/St. Martin's. ISBN   978-0-312-53493-6.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.