Author: Arlene White

This week’s assignment for 6300 Understanding Writing as a Process course is to read and locate ourselves among the range of voices in Chapter 1 titled “Bad Ideas About What Good Writing Is” from the book Bad Ideas About Writing by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe.  I explored perspectives associated with the section titled “Reading and Writing Are Not Connected” by Ellen C. Carillo.  My interest was sparked by assigned reading of The Rise of Writing by Deborah Brandt in Dr. Laura McGrath’s 6650 Introduction to Studies course.

Continue reading “Reading and Writing: Tied for First Place”

This week’s assignment for 6300 Understanding Writing as a Process course is to read the “Introduction” and locate ourselves among the range of voices in “Bad Ideas About Style, Usage, and Grammar” from the book Bad Ideas About Writing by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe.  I was drawn to the section titled “Teaching Grammar Improves Writing” by Patricia A. Dunn.

I will start by saying I have much respect for the Ball and Loewe compilation of entries on bad ideas.  The “Introduction” relates their work is more of an effort to suggest better ideas than to simply name bad ones (Ball and Loewe 2).   Readers are told the entries “…offer a practical action-oriented group of rational manifestos for discontinuing unhelpful or exclusionary ideas about a subject and activity that all have a stake in (Ball and Loewe 3).”  I admit to having had a vested interest in the correct use of grammar and all it entails.

Continue reading “Rules of Grammar: Do You Remember What I Told You to Forget?”

This week’s assignment for 6300 Understanding Writing as a Process course is to read and locate ourselves among the range of voices in “Bad Ideas About Assessing Writing” from the book Bad Ideas About Writing by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe.  My reflection centers on two sections titled “When Responding to Student Writing, More Is Better” by Muriel Harris and “Student Writing Must Be Graded by the Teacher” by Christopher R. Friend.  I was drawn to the section on responding because I’ve had my share of writing assessed by teachers who strongly favored that practice, and I wanted to explore whether my own perspective aligns with Harris’ position.  The other section intrigued me because I wanted to discover Friend’s alternative approach to teachers grading papers.

Continue reading “Teacher Responding and Grading: More or Less?”

This week’s assignment for 6300 Understanding Writing as a Process course is to read and locate ourselves among the range of voices in “Bad Ideas About Writing and Digital Technologies” from the book Bad Ideas About Writing by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe.  My voice is linked to the section titled “Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants” by Phill Michael Alexander.  I stand with Alexander in deconstructing myth associated with labeling those born before or after the technological boom. Continue reading “Wherever Writing Takes Me”

This week’s assignment for 6300 Understanding Writing as a Process course is to read and locate ourselves among the range of voices in “Bad Ideas About Genre” from the book Bad Ideas About Writing by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe.  I’m drawn to the contribution titled “Excellent Academic Writing Must be Serious” by Michael Theune.  The topic interests me because I self-identify as a “creative writer” of non-fiction with a chronic predisposition toward injecting humor into everything I write – even academic discourse! Continue reading “Seriously?!”

Writing My Writing

 

This week’s reading assignment for our 6300 Understanding Writing as a Process course was comprised of sections from the book Bad Ideas About Writing by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe.  We were to read the Introduction and Chapter 2 titled “Bad Ideas About Who Good Writers Are” of the publication.  I focused on “The More Writing Process, the Better” by Jimmy Butts from Chapter 2.  His argument on writing as a process is in direct contrast to what has been discussed in class so far this term. Continue reading “Writing My Writing”

My observations start with the Revisions to the WPA Outcomes Statement.  One assertion is writing process’ increasing reliance upon digital technologies: “Writers’ composing activities have always been shaped by the technologies available to them, and digital technologies are changing writers’ relationships to their texts and audiences in evolving ways (Harrington, et al. 321-325).” This indicates teaching of writing should be in accordance with that evolution. Continue reading “Observations on WPA Outcomes Statement and NCTE Position Statements”

As I began reading Concept 5.0, I was a bit perplexed.  The writer appeared to deconstruct the “social turn” of writing theory by returning to its “cognitive” phenomenon.  My mind was reeling somewhat like the lights in the video image below until further reading convinced me social and cognitive aspects of writing may perform congruently.

Image courtesy of Pexel Videos

Continue reading “Writing Involves Reflection”

Concept 4.0 proclaims writers never learn all there is to know about writing.  The text declares this lesson to be either frustrating or inspiring to a writer.  I find inspiration in the “…imperfectability of writing and the fact that it is not a “natural” phenomenon… (Adler-Kassner and Wardle 59).”  If, however, it is frustrating, the possibility exists to write through it.

Continue reading “Writing is Perpetual Learning”

 

Statements in Concept 3.0 and Concept 3.1 assert: “Through writing, writers come to develop and perform identities in relation to the interests, beliefs, and values of the communities they engage with…The act of writing, then, is not so much about using a particular set of skills as it is about becoming a particular kind of person, about developing a sense of who we are (Adler-Kassner and Wardle 50-51).”

Continue reading “Writing: Identity Unveiled”