![Picture](/uploads/4/2/6/9/42692587/7019978_orig.gif)
Overall Reflection:
Within the course, ENC 1101, I found myself gaining new strategies and skills about writing and reading through the discussion posts, major projects, and peer reviews. Throughout the duration of the semester, I developed confidence in my writing and numerous tips for writing. I feel extremely accomplished from summarizing various articles in our textbook "Writing About Writing: A College Reader,” and completing four major projects. I firmly believe that my writing began drastically improving since the first discussion post assignment, Lamott's “Shitty First Drafts.” The writing process project improved my writing in particular because it was one of the first things that made me aware of my bad composing habits. I recommend this textbook to anyone who seeks success and takes pride in their work because it was extremely helpful. Each author highlighted something opposite and gave useful tips to better my writing. Another thing that I found effective was the opportunity to have our pears revise our papers. With the opinions of my classmates, I made great changes to my papers. With the opportunity to see others discussion posts and edit their paper's, my eyes were opened to different writing styles. As ENC 1101 comes to a close, I prepare myself for ENC 1102 and plan to take all I have learned and use it in the duration of the next level.
Favorite Discussion Post(s) Reflection:
Rose and Stephen Fry, Prior, and Perl were my favorite discussion posts that I wrote because they involved the first unit of ENC 1101, where the goal was to help recognize your writing processes, learn how texts are composed, and develop strategies to improving your writing. I learned the importance of tracing your texts, creating multiple drafts, analyzing and observing texts, effects of rigid rules, and other ways to recognize how texts are composed. Although I struggled while creating my final draft for the Writing Process paper, I felt like like unit was my favorite due to the interest I found in the articles we analyzed.
Rose and Stephen Fry (8/30/14):
After reading Mike Rose's text, “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Shifting of Language,” I am able to identify his point. After analyzing the experience of ten of his undergraduate writing students, he developed a belief in which states how rules of writing disrupt the process instead of strengthen it. Within the group of undergraduate students, there were five that suffered from writers block, known as “blockers,” and five known as “un-blockers.” “What separated the five students who blocked from those who didn't?” It wasn't skill; that was held fairly constant. The answer could have rested in the emotional realm-anxiety, fear of evaluation, insecurity, etc. Or perhaps blocking in some way resulted from variation in cognitive style” (Rose, 534)
Rose continues with examples to show the difference between his blocked and un-blocked students, “The five students who experienced blocking were all operating either with writing rules or with planning strategies that impeded rather than enhanced the composing process. The five students who were not hampered by writer's block also utilized rules, but they were less rigid ones, and thus more appropriate to a complex process like writing” (Rose, 534). He made it clear that the non-blockers were more open minded to sources, functional, and adjustable.
Several main concepts of “rules” and “plans” were introduced by Rose. He described two types of rules, heuristics and algorithms. “Most often we function with the aid of fairly general heuristics or “rules of thumb,” guidelines that allow varying degrees of flexibility when approaching problems. Rather than operating with algorithmic precision and certainty, we search, critically, through alternatives, using our heuristic as a divining rod...” (Rose, 536). He notes the difference between rules and plans. Plans are hierarchical procedures, they include and sequence heuristic and algorithmic rules.
After providing numerous details about blockers and non-blockers, Rose ends with a summary on treatment. Throughout the text, he supported his belief that the rules of writing impede the process instead of support it. I think his opinion relates to Stephen Fry, a British comedian who also dislikes the rules of not only writing, but language. The kinetic typography video of Stephen talking proves his belief that language has worsened over time. He uses a series of literary tools, such as alliteration, to support his hatred toward people who use their knowledge of language in the wrong way. He thinks people refrain from using their words freely, yet instead correct individuals who use their language improperly. I enjoyed the format of this video because it caught my attention and made me realize that there is no such thing as correct or incorrect language.
Rose, Mike. “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer's Block.” College Composition and Communication 31.4 (1980): 389-401. Print.
Fry, Stephen. “Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography – Language.” YouTube. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2014.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY>.
Paul Prior (9/3/14):
Within the article, "Tracing Process: How Texts Come Into Being," Paul Prior clarifies the processes we experience when we write. His goal is to provide a system of methods used in writing, while making readers compare their own writing techniques to his. He wants to inspire readers to write with improvement. According to Prior, “If you want to understand why a text is written as it is, how it might have been written differently, how it came to meet some goals but not others, how it could have been written better, then it makes sense to look not just at the text itself, but at the history of work and the varied materials from which the text was produced” (Prior, 2004, 493).
Prior argues that writing consists of two different practices, inscription and composition. Inscription is the act of writing, you're getting words onto a surface, such as a computer. In order to complete the writing process, we tend to go through various inscriptions, such as a “shitty first draft.” Composing is the mental and physical act of creating ideas and arguments. This is an ongoing process and may be produced by more than one person. Prior notes the importance of the way texts are, inter-textually, with support from other sources/ideas, and “the dialogic influences of real and imagined audiences” (Prior, 2004, 496). He wants readers to understand that writing is always inscribed and composed in a particular context.
He continues by providing methods of analysis, beginning with the importance of gathering and keeping track of your texts. “In many cases, intertextual analysis reveal much about the structure of participation as well as about the sources of the text” (Prior, 2004, 498). In order to do intertextual analysis, you need to recognize what type of text your text is referring to: initiating text, relating text to source texts, tracing a series of texts, or no text at all, such as a conversation. Using these strategies, we can figure out where our ideas came from, which Prior names intertextual tracing.
Prior announces another writing method, concurrent accounts, also known as think-aloud protocols. He provides an example of instructions for a reading-to-write task that involves reading aloud, vocalizing, the words you write, and saying aloud what you are thinking about. “The idea is to provide a kind of stream-of-consciousness commentary on your thinking, not an explanation or account of your thinking” (Prior, 2004, 506). Another methodology Prior provides is to keep a process log in which you keep track of all of your writing, reading that relates to your writing, and what you think and how you feel about your writing. Also, to collect data we can use the following types of interviewing: semi-structured, stimulated elicitation, drawing, and videotaped recording. After reading Prior's text, I've realized that it's essential to understand where texts come from.
Prior, Paul. “Tracing Process: How Texts Come Into Being.” What Writing Does and How It Does It. Ed. Charles Bazerman and Paul Prior. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004. 167-200. Print.
Perl (9/10/14):
Within “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers,” Sondra Perl gives the results of a study performed on five unskilled college writers. She begins with the original goals of the study, “The research addressed three major questions: (1) How do unskilled writers write? (2) Can their writing processes be analyzed in a systematic, replicable manner? And (3) What does an increased understanding of their processes suggest about the nature of composing in general and the manner in which writing is taught in the schools?” (Perl, 616). In order to answer these questions, the study analyzed data consisting of key elements in the composing process. The strategy made in this research allows the composing process to be viewed while it unfolds: standardized, categorical, concise, structural, and diachronic. Other data analysis methods consisted of the code, the continuum, and analyzing miscues in the writing process.
Perl continued with a synopsis of a case study on Tony, one of the five participants in this study. With a series of graphs, tables, and details, his writing performance was easy to catch. For example, Perl explained his behavior, “The most salient feature of Tony's composing process was its recursiveness. Tony rarely produced a sentence without stopping to reread either a part or the whole” (Pearl, 624). Perl also told about his fluency, strategies, level of language use, editing, and miscue analysis. “Tony concluded the composing process with unresolved stylistic and syntactic problems. The conclusion here is not that Tony can't write, or that Tony doesn't know how to write, or that Tony needs to learn more rules: Tony is a writer with a highly consistent and deeply embedded recursive process” (Perl, 628).
Summary of the findings showed that although Tony had numerous problems with composing and editing, he demonstrated consistent composing processes just like all of the other students. Other findings were reviewing under three sections of the composing process, prewriting, writing, and editing. After reading this text, I am able to recognize many aspects of how writing is taught. It showed that even though certain writers are less skilled than others, everyone is practicing an original and complex writing routine. “Teaching composing, then, means paying attention not only to the forms or products but also to the explicative process through which they arise” (Pearl, 635).
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 13.4 (1979): 317-36. Print.
Peers' Postings:
Marley Messner (8/27/14), helped me understand and elaborate on the Rose and Fry reading.
In Mike Rose's Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer's Block, he wrote about a lot of different rules that interfere and help with writing. The rules he talks about are examples of what people deal with every time they write. I have always been taught to write to grab the reader's attention right away and it has always been a huge struggle for me. I encounter a lot of obstacles when I try to write, even writing this discussion is hard for me because I'm always so concerned about what people will think. A lot of the concepts that Rose talks about are hard for me to understand like the different strategies to problem-solving and planning. It could be because I've always been taught to write a specific way. To me, every piece of writing should have an introduction paragraph, 3 body paragraphs each explaining a different idea, and a conclusion. Anything else would freak me out because that's all I know. I know I would be the one who would have the hardest time changing the way I write. In Kinetic Topography, Stephen Fry sort of mocks the people that correct grammar and punctuation. I personally think that using correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation is an important part of writing but that might just be the perfectionist in me.
Rose, Mike. "Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer's Block." College Composition and Communication 31.4 (1930): 389-401. Print.
Fry, Stephen. Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography- Language. Youtube, Web. 30 September, 2010. <http://youtu.be/J7E-aoXLZGY>
My Reply to Marley (8/27/14):
Put it this way, a conversation that flows with words used freely will turn out better than a conversation with someone you're trying to impress by the way you're speaking. It's the same way with writing, you can't worry about what the reader thinks because they are going to judge you anyway. Express yourself, let your words come out, and if they don't like what you're saying at least you gave it your all. I think Rose and Fry support my opinion because they show their hatred toward people that use constant rules of writing and language. A person that acknowledges the perfection of writing and language too much will find it less enjoyable. After reading Rose's text and watching Stephens video, I feel like I can write with more confidence.
Alejandro Arcay (9/1/14), helped me understand and elaborate on the Perl discussion post.
In the research "The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers" by Sondra Perl, a study was done to determine how unskilled writers perform, if their writing processes can be analyzed in a systematic, replicable manner and what an increased understanding of their processes suggest about the nature of composing in general and the manner in which is taught in schools. The study took place during the 1975-76 fall semester at a University. They were then selected based on writing samples that qualified them as an unskilled writer and the willingness to participate.
Based on the data analysis, three kinds of data were collected in the study which was the students' written products, their composing tapes and their responses to the interview. The summary of the findings were actually pretty interesting, studies showed that all of the students displayed consistent composing processes. By that, they showed the traditional pre-writing, writing, and editing phases which suggests a much greater internalization of process that has ever before been expected.
During the pre-writing, the students in this study began writing within the first few minutes. The pre-writing phase consisted of three principle strategies which were rephrasing the topic until they made a connection, turning a larger topic into topics much smaller and initiating strings of associations to words in the given topic and developing these associations during the writing. Students tended not to have a clue as to how they were going to start off their essay even after reading the topic multiple times.
During the writing phase, the writer begins in baby steps writing piece by piece. By doing so, the writer reflects on each of these pieces allowing him to elaborate on his writing. As the sentences begin to form, the reader then rereads his progress to make sure that his writing is supporting what is being asked.
The editing phase plays a huge role in the composing process as the students the study begin to edit their drafts with changes in spelling, word choice, the context of words and syntax. Sometimes, errors in these works can be created during the editing phase and the pre-existing ones don’t get fixed, ironically. This can be a direct correlation with rule confusion, where students go by what they think is right over what sounds right.
After this study, results show that the time spent over the rules of writing can diminish the thrill for unskilled writers. Also, to those students who are classified as “beginners”, one must assess what they know first before teaching them as that can be detrimental to the learning process. During this research, I feel that Tony really learned a lot from what the findings concluded. I feel that he learned where his weaknesses were in his writing styles and what he could do to better them. In conclusion, it’s important to focus on going through the right channels in getting a student to be a better writer. That is, analyzing what they already know to them teach them what they don’t.
Perl, Sondra. "The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers." Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Eds. Wardle and Downs. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 317-336. Print.
My Reply to Alejandro (9/2/14):
You're right, although Tony was extremely analyzed and criticized, he learned a lot from what the findings concluded, Such as what he needs in order to become a better writer. According to Perl, "What he needs are teachers who can interpret that processes for him, who can see through the tangles in the process just as he sees meaning beneath the tangles in his prose, and who can intervene in such a way that untangling his composing process leads him to create better prose" (Perl, 628). She made it clear that although Tony can write, he needs more rules while following the writing process. After reading this section of the text about Tony, I developed a better understanding of the composing process and learned many tips for my personal writing.
Within the course, ENC 1101, I found myself gaining new strategies and skills about writing and reading through the discussion posts, major projects, and peer reviews. Throughout the duration of the semester, I developed confidence in my writing and numerous tips for writing. I feel extremely accomplished from summarizing various articles in our textbook "Writing About Writing: A College Reader,” and completing four major projects. I firmly believe that my writing began drastically improving since the first discussion post assignment, Lamott's “Shitty First Drafts.” The writing process project improved my writing in particular because it was one of the first things that made me aware of my bad composing habits. I recommend this textbook to anyone who seeks success and takes pride in their work because it was extremely helpful. Each author highlighted something opposite and gave useful tips to better my writing. Another thing that I found effective was the opportunity to have our pears revise our papers. With the opinions of my classmates, I made great changes to my papers. With the opportunity to see others discussion posts and edit their paper's, my eyes were opened to different writing styles. As ENC 1101 comes to a close, I prepare myself for ENC 1102 and plan to take all I have learned and use it in the duration of the next level.
Favorite Discussion Post(s) Reflection:
Rose and Stephen Fry, Prior, and Perl were my favorite discussion posts that I wrote because they involved the first unit of ENC 1101, where the goal was to help recognize your writing processes, learn how texts are composed, and develop strategies to improving your writing. I learned the importance of tracing your texts, creating multiple drafts, analyzing and observing texts, effects of rigid rules, and other ways to recognize how texts are composed. Although I struggled while creating my final draft for the Writing Process paper, I felt like like unit was my favorite due to the interest I found in the articles we analyzed.
Rose and Stephen Fry (8/30/14):
After reading Mike Rose's text, “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Shifting of Language,” I am able to identify his point. After analyzing the experience of ten of his undergraduate writing students, he developed a belief in which states how rules of writing disrupt the process instead of strengthen it. Within the group of undergraduate students, there were five that suffered from writers block, known as “blockers,” and five known as “un-blockers.” “What separated the five students who blocked from those who didn't?” It wasn't skill; that was held fairly constant. The answer could have rested in the emotional realm-anxiety, fear of evaluation, insecurity, etc. Or perhaps blocking in some way resulted from variation in cognitive style” (Rose, 534)
Rose continues with examples to show the difference between his blocked and un-blocked students, “The five students who experienced blocking were all operating either with writing rules or with planning strategies that impeded rather than enhanced the composing process. The five students who were not hampered by writer's block also utilized rules, but they were less rigid ones, and thus more appropriate to a complex process like writing” (Rose, 534). He made it clear that the non-blockers were more open minded to sources, functional, and adjustable.
Several main concepts of “rules” and “plans” were introduced by Rose. He described two types of rules, heuristics and algorithms. “Most often we function with the aid of fairly general heuristics or “rules of thumb,” guidelines that allow varying degrees of flexibility when approaching problems. Rather than operating with algorithmic precision and certainty, we search, critically, through alternatives, using our heuristic as a divining rod...” (Rose, 536). He notes the difference between rules and plans. Plans are hierarchical procedures, they include and sequence heuristic and algorithmic rules.
After providing numerous details about blockers and non-blockers, Rose ends with a summary on treatment. Throughout the text, he supported his belief that the rules of writing impede the process instead of support it. I think his opinion relates to Stephen Fry, a British comedian who also dislikes the rules of not only writing, but language. The kinetic typography video of Stephen talking proves his belief that language has worsened over time. He uses a series of literary tools, such as alliteration, to support his hatred toward people who use their knowledge of language in the wrong way. He thinks people refrain from using their words freely, yet instead correct individuals who use their language improperly. I enjoyed the format of this video because it caught my attention and made me realize that there is no such thing as correct or incorrect language.
Rose, Mike. “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer's Block.” College Composition and Communication 31.4 (1980): 389-401. Print.
Fry, Stephen. “Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography – Language.” YouTube. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Aug. 2014.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY>.
Paul Prior (9/3/14):
Within the article, "Tracing Process: How Texts Come Into Being," Paul Prior clarifies the processes we experience when we write. His goal is to provide a system of methods used in writing, while making readers compare their own writing techniques to his. He wants to inspire readers to write with improvement. According to Prior, “If you want to understand why a text is written as it is, how it might have been written differently, how it came to meet some goals but not others, how it could have been written better, then it makes sense to look not just at the text itself, but at the history of work and the varied materials from which the text was produced” (Prior, 2004, 493).
Prior argues that writing consists of two different practices, inscription and composition. Inscription is the act of writing, you're getting words onto a surface, such as a computer. In order to complete the writing process, we tend to go through various inscriptions, such as a “shitty first draft.” Composing is the mental and physical act of creating ideas and arguments. This is an ongoing process and may be produced by more than one person. Prior notes the importance of the way texts are, inter-textually, with support from other sources/ideas, and “the dialogic influences of real and imagined audiences” (Prior, 2004, 496). He wants readers to understand that writing is always inscribed and composed in a particular context.
He continues by providing methods of analysis, beginning with the importance of gathering and keeping track of your texts. “In many cases, intertextual analysis reveal much about the structure of participation as well as about the sources of the text” (Prior, 2004, 498). In order to do intertextual analysis, you need to recognize what type of text your text is referring to: initiating text, relating text to source texts, tracing a series of texts, or no text at all, such as a conversation. Using these strategies, we can figure out where our ideas came from, which Prior names intertextual tracing.
Prior announces another writing method, concurrent accounts, also known as think-aloud protocols. He provides an example of instructions for a reading-to-write task that involves reading aloud, vocalizing, the words you write, and saying aloud what you are thinking about. “The idea is to provide a kind of stream-of-consciousness commentary on your thinking, not an explanation or account of your thinking” (Prior, 2004, 506). Another methodology Prior provides is to keep a process log in which you keep track of all of your writing, reading that relates to your writing, and what you think and how you feel about your writing. Also, to collect data we can use the following types of interviewing: semi-structured, stimulated elicitation, drawing, and videotaped recording. After reading Prior's text, I've realized that it's essential to understand where texts come from.
Prior, Paul. “Tracing Process: How Texts Come Into Being.” What Writing Does and How It Does It. Ed. Charles Bazerman and Paul Prior. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004. 167-200. Print.
Perl (9/10/14):
Within “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers,” Sondra Perl gives the results of a study performed on five unskilled college writers. She begins with the original goals of the study, “The research addressed three major questions: (1) How do unskilled writers write? (2) Can their writing processes be analyzed in a systematic, replicable manner? And (3) What does an increased understanding of their processes suggest about the nature of composing in general and the manner in which writing is taught in the schools?” (Perl, 616). In order to answer these questions, the study analyzed data consisting of key elements in the composing process. The strategy made in this research allows the composing process to be viewed while it unfolds: standardized, categorical, concise, structural, and diachronic. Other data analysis methods consisted of the code, the continuum, and analyzing miscues in the writing process.
Perl continued with a synopsis of a case study on Tony, one of the five participants in this study. With a series of graphs, tables, and details, his writing performance was easy to catch. For example, Perl explained his behavior, “The most salient feature of Tony's composing process was its recursiveness. Tony rarely produced a sentence without stopping to reread either a part or the whole” (Pearl, 624). Perl also told about his fluency, strategies, level of language use, editing, and miscue analysis. “Tony concluded the composing process with unresolved stylistic and syntactic problems. The conclusion here is not that Tony can't write, or that Tony doesn't know how to write, or that Tony needs to learn more rules: Tony is a writer with a highly consistent and deeply embedded recursive process” (Perl, 628).
Summary of the findings showed that although Tony had numerous problems with composing and editing, he demonstrated consistent composing processes just like all of the other students. Other findings were reviewing under three sections of the composing process, prewriting, writing, and editing. After reading this text, I am able to recognize many aspects of how writing is taught. It showed that even though certain writers are less skilled than others, everyone is practicing an original and complex writing routine. “Teaching composing, then, means paying attention not only to the forms or products but also to the explicative process through which they arise” (Pearl, 635).
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 13.4 (1979): 317-36. Print.
Peers' Postings:
Marley Messner (8/27/14), helped me understand and elaborate on the Rose and Fry reading.
In Mike Rose's Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer's Block, he wrote about a lot of different rules that interfere and help with writing. The rules he talks about are examples of what people deal with every time they write. I have always been taught to write to grab the reader's attention right away and it has always been a huge struggle for me. I encounter a lot of obstacles when I try to write, even writing this discussion is hard for me because I'm always so concerned about what people will think. A lot of the concepts that Rose talks about are hard for me to understand like the different strategies to problem-solving and planning. It could be because I've always been taught to write a specific way. To me, every piece of writing should have an introduction paragraph, 3 body paragraphs each explaining a different idea, and a conclusion. Anything else would freak me out because that's all I know. I know I would be the one who would have the hardest time changing the way I write. In Kinetic Topography, Stephen Fry sort of mocks the people that correct grammar and punctuation. I personally think that using correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation is an important part of writing but that might just be the perfectionist in me.
Rose, Mike. "Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writer's Block." College Composition and Communication 31.4 (1930): 389-401. Print.
Fry, Stephen. Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography- Language. Youtube, Web. 30 September, 2010. <http://youtu.be/J7E-aoXLZGY>
My Reply to Marley (8/27/14):
Put it this way, a conversation that flows with words used freely will turn out better than a conversation with someone you're trying to impress by the way you're speaking. It's the same way with writing, you can't worry about what the reader thinks because they are going to judge you anyway. Express yourself, let your words come out, and if they don't like what you're saying at least you gave it your all. I think Rose and Fry support my opinion because they show their hatred toward people that use constant rules of writing and language. A person that acknowledges the perfection of writing and language too much will find it less enjoyable. After reading Rose's text and watching Stephens video, I feel like I can write with more confidence.
Alejandro Arcay (9/1/14), helped me understand and elaborate on the Perl discussion post.
In the research "The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers" by Sondra Perl, a study was done to determine how unskilled writers perform, if their writing processes can be analyzed in a systematic, replicable manner and what an increased understanding of their processes suggest about the nature of composing in general and the manner in which is taught in schools. The study took place during the 1975-76 fall semester at a University. They were then selected based on writing samples that qualified them as an unskilled writer and the willingness to participate.
Based on the data analysis, three kinds of data were collected in the study which was the students' written products, their composing tapes and their responses to the interview. The summary of the findings were actually pretty interesting, studies showed that all of the students displayed consistent composing processes. By that, they showed the traditional pre-writing, writing, and editing phases which suggests a much greater internalization of process that has ever before been expected.
During the pre-writing, the students in this study began writing within the first few minutes. The pre-writing phase consisted of three principle strategies which were rephrasing the topic until they made a connection, turning a larger topic into topics much smaller and initiating strings of associations to words in the given topic and developing these associations during the writing. Students tended not to have a clue as to how they were going to start off their essay even after reading the topic multiple times.
During the writing phase, the writer begins in baby steps writing piece by piece. By doing so, the writer reflects on each of these pieces allowing him to elaborate on his writing. As the sentences begin to form, the reader then rereads his progress to make sure that his writing is supporting what is being asked.
The editing phase plays a huge role in the composing process as the students the study begin to edit their drafts with changes in spelling, word choice, the context of words and syntax. Sometimes, errors in these works can be created during the editing phase and the pre-existing ones don’t get fixed, ironically. This can be a direct correlation with rule confusion, where students go by what they think is right over what sounds right.
After this study, results show that the time spent over the rules of writing can diminish the thrill for unskilled writers. Also, to those students who are classified as “beginners”, one must assess what they know first before teaching them as that can be detrimental to the learning process. During this research, I feel that Tony really learned a lot from what the findings concluded. I feel that he learned where his weaknesses were in his writing styles and what he could do to better them. In conclusion, it’s important to focus on going through the right channels in getting a student to be a better writer. That is, analyzing what they already know to them teach them what they don’t.
Perl, Sondra. "The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers." Writing About Writing: A College Reader. Eds. Wardle and Downs. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins, 2011. 317-336. Print.
My Reply to Alejandro (9/2/14):
You're right, although Tony was extremely analyzed and criticized, he learned a lot from what the findings concluded, Such as what he needs in order to become a better writer. According to Perl, "What he needs are teachers who can interpret that processes for him, who can see through the tangles in the process just as he sees meaning beneath the tangles in his prose, and who can intervene in such a way that untangling his composing process leads him to create better prose" (Perl, 628). She made it clear that although Tony can write, he needs more rules while following the writing process. After reading this section of the text about Tony, I developed a better understanding of the composing process and learned many tips for my personal writing.