Murray discusses the way writing is taught claiming that it should be taught as a process not as a product. Think about this and compare/contrast it to what you experienced in English classes. Was what you experienced effective, why/why not? Do you agree or disagree with Murray, explain.
Comparing Murray's article with my high school English experience I can see both similarities and differences. I had a mixture of teachers that used methods, exercises, and assignments in both ways. Most teachers would give us a prompt along with a rubric. For the most part, with the exception of some classes, it did not matter exactly how we got to the finished product. The grade at the end was a combination of meeting the requirements of the rubric and turning in all parts of our "process" in getting there. I feel that I had many opportunities to choose how I got to my finished product but not many in which I could choose what I wrote about. This is most likely due to the fact that writing was rolled up with literature, critical thinking, and other concepts we had to cover before the end of the year.
From my experiences with writing I think it is safe to say I will not be writing any masterpieces soon. Is this because of the writing instruction I received? I can write a good solid essay. I can write formal as well as informal letters to people. My emails, paragraphs, and work is all understandable and done well. Maybe the way I was taught to write was not the absolute best but I think I turned out just fine as a writer.
I hate to make it seem like I do not have an opinion on the matter but when asked if I agree or disagree with Murray I must say that I do not take one particular side over the other. I think that the typical way children are taught (how Murray perceived most children are taught) has a certain amount of value. Teachers should allow students to be creative, free, thinkers but they also have the responsibility of teaching their students the basics. Students need to be taught the basic ways of prewrite otherwise they will have no idea what it entails. Teachers have between 21-30 students in their classroom at a time. High school teachers see their students five times a week for forty-five minutes. Students need to be assessed whether they are understanding literature, understanding core concepts, writing well, and many other things. Teachers need to have to have something physical to grade to make sure that students are grasping the material. The way our country has school set up leads to the way our subjects are taught. Murray is right that the process and creativity/individuality of writing gets lost for most students. That perhaps we would have more/better writers if writing was taught differently. We need to find a way to meld these two concepts (product versus process).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree with you, Kayla. I feel as though this argument is similar to many of the debates over theories we have been discussing in class. It seems that the most successful writers learn to write through a blend of these theories. By emphasizing the process, we are pushing our students to learn from their own writing, to self-critique and to discuss their writing and ideas with others. They use critical thinking skills while planning, writing, and rewriting. But I also believe that there are times when the finished product should be emphasized. In college classes, our professors do not want to see our drafts, but rather our finished product. Although many professors are willing to meet with us to help improve our papers, our grade is based upon our finished product. We must emphasize the process, but also prepare our students for the “real world” where the process is not always appreciated.
ReplyDeleteKayla-
ReplyDeleteIn my own experiences, I have found that the product has been emphasized more than the process. Throughout high school, my teachers rarely collected first or second drafts of my papers along with my final copies. Because of this, I feel like the emphasis was placed more on the outcome of my writing, rather than the methods I used to reach that final paper. However, once I began my GWRIT class freshman year, this changed completely. My teacher required that we submit anything and everything that went into our final paper. I feel like this made me a better writer, because my teacher was clearly able to see where my thoughts originally came from. Therefore, I agree with Murray that writing should be taught as a process. By doing this, students and teachers are on the same page, and the final product will contain more meaning than if graded solely on the final step.
In my English classes that I have experienced, I have seen the way writing is taught in both claims; as a process and also as a product. In elementary school it is where we learn officially begin to learn the writing process. I remember in almost every classroom there were posters present on the walls listing and describing the writing process in order. Teachers continually stressed the importance of it year after year and religiously followed each step as they pounded it into our brains. As we moved into the end of middle school and high school, the process was not stressed as much. Instead, we were given a topic to write about, given a due date, and expected to make a writing “product” and hand it in. Because of the limited amount of time and out-of-class writing, I rarely used the writing process. Instead, I was so wrapped up in writing and finishing this paper, I rarely revised and edited, and if I did it was quickly and not as in-depth.
ReplyDeleteAfter looking back at these two different ways of writing I experienced, I agree with Murray. I think that in order to teach writing, you need to look at it as a process. Without the process you will not get a well-written product.