The portfolio system he discusses sounds promising as does the grid but I felt his “added categories” evidence his generous nature as it allowed students a greater opportunity to excel and find greater confidence in their other skills. My favorite section was on “liking.” The idea of liking one’s own writing and being comfortable enough to say so is so basic and yet quite powerful. Once we take ownership it becomes our responsibility to improve on the initial work without losing that important idea our uncut version expresses. Every writing task should and usually does take on that identity, but some are always more critical than others. The desire to keep working on each piece one writes is a huge step towards writing maturity.
About his interaction with students, Elbow emphasizes an obvious but extremely relevant point; if you begin to know and understand your students as people it becomes easier to “like” their writing. As parents we read our children’s work and positively influence their writing; in much the same way, Elbow recommends getting to know students through non-graded free writing and reciprocate through a letter to them, constructed on a more personal level. This sharing of self creates an atmosphere of openness and enables the students to feel confident in their self-expression while allowing the teacher the necessary insight as to why they write as they do. I really enjoyed the entire paper, particularly his astute ideas about taking that extra step with students in an effort to like their writing better and thus, make the teacher’s job less tedious.
Patrick Hartwell’s “Grammar, Grammars, and the Teaching of Grammar” clearly defines his opinion on what he stolidly believes--the idea of teaching “grammar” to aid a student’s ability to write well is both ridiculous and unnecessary. I agree to a point, that these types of classes do not belong in a university, however, students need to have been taught the basics well enough to be able to write effectively and get their point across clearly, concisely, and with the correct mechanics of punctuation, sentence structure, and so on. Because language is ever-changing, as illustrated by Hartwell’s expansion of grammar from three to five meanings, forcing students to always be up on these nuances seems counter-productive when they are trying to master the ability to write well and prove their thesis on any given point. An excellent proficiency in grammar, though helpful on other levels, unfortunately, cannot provide those skills. But, in grammar’s defense, a working knowledge of its specifics can make the writing experience much less threatening, and proofreading a far less tedious task. In truth, I enjoyed this essay and lean more towards Hartwell’s camp on the grammar topic, despite my naïve impressionit should be ingrained by the time a student reaches the college level!
No comments:
Post a Comment