Writing to Learn

While Learning to Write (LW), Writing to Learn Content (WLC) and Writing to Learn Language (WLL) are all useful and valid in particular contexts and under particular conditions, I agree with Ortega when she says that these divisions often create "misalignments" between teacher and student understandings.

This is particularly problematic in the context of second language writing.  In the context of ELL in higher education, the WLL approach and LW dominate.  However, if one subscribes to the ideas that writing/composing is a form of learning (which I do), exclusive adherence to the WLL and LW approaches are limiting at best (although I would argue they are restrictive, prescriptive and unjust).

 At the early stages of language learning there is always some degree of WLL and LW, but if the goals of instruction includes engaging students in making meaning, there must be a shift to  Writing to Learn (not specific content necessarily, but writing itself as an act through which we learn not only language and "how to write", but who we are as writers and thinkers).

As an instructor of English Language Learners, even true beginners who are learning to compose at the sentence level, I want to engage my students in meaningful composing---whether this is multi modal or multilingual, I privilege content and meaning over form.  We take time to discuss the language and form, but that does not drive the curriculum and instruction. 


Comments

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