Reflections on Don Murray's Implications for Writing Part 2

image from wikimedia,
some rights reserved from Stowe

Don Murray has so much good advice for writing teachers that I had to break my reponse into two posts. Again, his focus is on having teachers see writing as a process, not a product.

Implication 6: Mechanics come last. Comma splices are difficult to ignore, but they're even more difficult to correct withou a pen in hand. When I'm conferencing with a student, I've tried to leave the pen on the desk and read for meaning and logic. After revision, that sentence with the comma splice may not even be there. It's an important lesson to teach our peer editors, also. They need to look for more than misspellings.



Implication 7: There must be time for the writing process to take place and time for it to end. I struggle with this on both ends. The way the Rhetoric class is set up, we have a new essay to write roughly every two weeks (give or take a few days). At some point, the next essay must begin. In Murray's comments, he readily admits that--at some point--we must move on. A wise colleague, Jack Prendergast, advised me not to be as concerned about when they get it; instead, we must be concerned with if.  I'll need to keep talking to my peers, reading journals and blogs, and talking with my students as I struggle with the concept of "late work" penalties when a student clearly has the talent and ability to do well in the course. Are we grading their punctuality or their skill?

Implication 8: Papers are examined to see what other choices the writer might make. I love this advice from Murray. By heeding it, I'm less likely to take control over a student's essay. I've mentioned before, I'd like students to see writing as a series of opportunities rather than a series of obstacles. Sometimes, I'm convinced that if they just did what I said, they'd be better off. They'll never get better as independent writers if they just do what I want, though.

Implication 9: Students are individuals who must explore the writing process in their own way, within the limits of the course deadlines, to find their own way to their own truth. It's easy to teach selfishly, having students write the way we prefer. Will their next teacher appreciate that? Do we all want the same thing? What happens when they're not students anymore, but citizens/employees/parents?

Implication 10: There are no rules, no absolutes, just alternatives. All writing is experimental. Like what Murray said earlier, it's choices, and I hope I can continue to allow students ownership of their writing so that they can find the best way to say what they intend as it suits the audience, purpose, genre, and medium. The www.ed.TED.com video included here about writing introductions gives great advice about writing introductions and thesis statements for a literary analysis, but how many other ways are there? The commens below the video suggest that there are a number of alternatives. A colleague, Joe Chellino, once said, "A student has to learn how to do something before he can reject it as a possibility." So, as long as we keep presenting students with alternatives, we're giving them a large repertoire of possibilities for approaching writing.

If I were asked to create a list of implications for considering writing as a process vs. a product, I'm certain that I would just end of plagiarizing what Murray has already laid out for us. But are there a few more ideas? I'd be interested to read any comments suggesting practices that would could be included after those Murray has suggested.