"I say never be complete, I say stop being perfect, I say, lets evolve, let the chips fall where they may"

As an English teacher, I struggle with how best to instruct the "nuts and bolts" of writing.  I had a difficult time paying attention when my English teacher attempted to show the mechanics of the writing process.  We learned the parts of speech, we diagramed sentences, and we learned that for every grammar rule there were a myriad of exceptions.  None of this was fun for me.  So, why would I want to turn around and teach my students in this current-traditional style of instruction?  I shouldn't.  It doesn't really work for me, but this is what I know. When I feel the pressure to produce students who write effectively, I panic and fall back on what I know, even if it is not the most comfortable and engaging method for my students and me.  This dilemma has placed me on a quest.  A journey to find the magic method of writing instruction.

Over the past month, I have scoured a variety of publications on this matter.  Today I would like to explore The Writing Teacher's Sourcebook edited by Edward Corbett, Nancy Myers, and Gary Tate.  In this book, Richard Fulkerson would refer to the method of instruction that I went through in my early days of eduction  as the "formalist approach."  This type of writing instruction clearly has value.  It places a focus on grammatical structure, and students learn that "good writing is 'correct' writing at the sentence level"(4).  With this philosophy, students will judge the effectiveness of writing by its "semantic intent" without considering the intended audience of the piece, the background of the writer, or the reality the writer wishes to reflect.  The advantage of this lies in what I will call "the formula."  Young writers will learn a prescribed method in which to write.  This makes it easy to self correct.  A writer either followed the "formula," or his/her writing was incorrect.  The problem that I have with this is that it does not hold true in the publishing world.  Some of the greatest pieces of literature do not follow this "formula."  My favorite authors do not follow this "formula."  It is safe to say that most people enjoy the individuality that comes from a writer taking a unique and fresh approach to a given work.  I personally could not live in a world where everyone wrote the same way with the same structure that produced the same tone, yet many student papers are all structured the same exact way.  It can cause a brutal night of essay grading.  I don't want any more of those, so it will require a new tactic.

The "mimetic approach"  seems to be more in my comfort zone.  The most intriguing idea with this method is the notion that good writing is linked with good thinking.  Here Fulkerson states that "the major problem with student writing is that it is not solidly thought out" (5).  With this philosophy, teachers should help students with how to think, or give them enough information about various topics so that they feel that their idea are worth sharing.  Ideally, a writing instructor would do both.  The AP Language and Composition exam has already moved in this direction.  For the past five years, the College Board has been using a synthesis essay topic that provides at least five sources that the students can refer to as they develop their essays.  I have seen this type of essay improve some of the analytical skills that are required on other part of the AP exam.  Students become aware of the break down in logic that occurs in argumentation, they become skilled at recognizing emotional appeals that exist in writing.  For me, this seems like the perfect way to introduce rhetoric.  Teach students the various ways to think, then apply aspects of structure and show how that structure changes the effect and meaning.

This is the core of rhetoric.  The relationship between the writer and his/her audience is a key part of recognizing good writing under the "rhetorical philosophy" that Fulkerson concludes his chapter with.  This is something my AP Language and Composition students really struggle with.  Very few students are exposed to this type of writing in the developmental stages of education.  Their audience is almost always the same person, their teacher.  Extending the variety of audience types is something that I am working on for my students next year.  Writing blogs is an easy way to incorporate this skill.  As I have been "blogging" for the past two weeks, I have become very aware of the variety of people who will read and comment on my writing.  It has pushed my writing.  I am more in tune with the sentence structures, word choice, and tone I use in my posts.  I would hope that this would make the quality better.  

With the many philosophies that exist when it comes to writing instruction, it is important to be mindful of how each one will shape pedagogy.  Teachers need to have their students participating in engaging and meaning exercises that will show them the power that can exist in appropriately sharing their ideas. Instructors need to be aware of their philosophy of writing instruction so that they can develop assessments based on their strengths and the strengths of their students.