Blog Post (2/6)

Reading chapter four of Talk About Writing, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that I am already emulating a lot of the strategies the tutors in the book use. There must be something kind of intuitive about the exchange of ideas when it comes to writing. Like the tutors surveyed in the study, I tend to let my students set the agenda (or “topic episodes”) at the start of each session. Most of my students are only in the initial brainstorming phase of their writing assignments, so I’m a little worried about what I will do when confronted with a draft. It is a little daunting to think about what global issues we might want to tackle first. I know when I was in undergrad I always (foolishly) considered my first draft my final draft, so I don’t want to crush too many dreams when, and if, substantial changes might be necessary in my students’ work. I’m concerned that I might be asking a few too many limiting leading questions, rather than letting the students figure it out for themselves. I should remember that if they want to improve at writing I must be patient enough to let them come to their own conclusions. Sometimes the awkward silence is a bit much for me – and time is of the essence in a 25-minute session – but I realize that learning can’t really happen when I spoon feed what I would do with an assignment.

My least favorite part of the writing process is worrying if what I am writing is understandable to people who aren’t me and worrying if what I am writing is even worth understanding. My favorite part of the writing process occurs on those (rare) occasions when I really hit a groove – when the ideas begin to flow naturally from one to the other. I like revising completed drafts because it feels like I’m progressing. As far as my students’ writing process goes, I think the hardest part is getting them to commit to an overarching argument. They have a lot of great, but disparate, ideas. I might want them to go in one direction, but ultimately, they must make the choice that is right for them. 

Comments

  1. UnknownFebruary 5, 2018 at 9:47 AM

    I had a similar reaction when I was reading "Talk About Writing" -- it was encouraging to think that I am doing naturally what the book was examining, things like toggling between instructing and "pumping" questions, and using a sentence-level example to point out a global problem. It's comforting to think that all these terms we are learning is much more straightforward in practice. Also, "Overall, tutors used 31.16 strategies per 10 minutes of conference interaction." Woah! I guess I should pay more attention next time.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing to Learn, Learning to Write

I'm familiar with different approaches in different contexts. As an instructor, I'm most familiar with learning to write, because even my content-based assignments receive extensive writing attention. As a student, though, I was and am more familiar with writing to learn. But I'm still displeased that as a student in English at the undergraduate, MA, and PhD levels, there was/is not more attention placed on learning to write. At this stage, this seems to be something professors take for granted. (I was recently told: "That's not how you title a dissertation chapter." And I responded: "Can you please tell me how you title a book chapter? I have never done this.") I think also in liberal arts required courses, writing to learn is prioritized in many (most?) disciplines. I'm not particularly persuaded by one form over another, though I have never succeeded in writing to learn language models. But I am partial to the idea that learning to write sho...
Read more

Emi 03/27

These two case studies consider two different research methods that will inevitably lead to very different discussions and presentation of the ideas.  T he non-fiction case study (Lorraine) is purely qualitative, while the academic case study (Fei) is a mixed methods study in which qualitative data is quantitized and the rest of the collected qualitative data (e.g. interview) mainly serves to enhance legitimation. These two different focus, qualitative (Lorraine) and Mixed methods with a focus on quantitative (Fei) are well accepted in research. However, the way that readers approach them may be very different. The qualitative (non-fiction) case study is more engaging, more relatable, and easier to read. As promoted in Qualitative research, the authors present the data as if it were a story and include very detailed anecdotes (called vignettes) that represent the main point to be conveyed. The study is not replicable, but the authors do provide additional information to ensure...
Read more

4/17

In my tutoring sessions, I've been most familiar with the 'learning to write' paradigm. I felt Ortega's statement that "...LW places at the center of attention the cognitive activity of the writer and her or his authorial voice" encapsulates the work my students have called on me to do. Whether they're working on a Peace Corps application, a psychology paper, a global health paper or a speech for Rhetoric, I've found my work can be described in Ortega's twofold statement: helping students put in writing first, their cognitive activity (their opinions, arguments, and questions) and second, their authorial voice (by airing confusions, doubts, and identifying needs for further research). In class, I'm wondering if we can have a discussion about the overlap between LW and WLL when it comes to students picking up specific language necessary for academic assignments. As Ortega writes, there is a difference between students "learning to write abo...
Read more