![Picture](/uploads/4/2/6/9/42692587/6571606.png?430)
What Is Good Writing To ME
VS
What Is Good Writing To THEM
Amanda had an extremely valid interpretation of what good writing is. I like how she began her post by stating, "The meaning of good writing is different depending on who you are talking to." She made numerous points to support her perspective such as including why it's important to be immersed in a good story in order to actually enjoy it. By reading this discussion point, I was introduced to new ideas of good writing.
Daniel reflected on his own personal experience on the book "My Sisters Keeper" in order to support his view point on good writing. I like how he mentioned how good writing should be something that your audience can relate to. Such as an emotional sense, like his experience with Justin, who was diagnosed with stage 4 neuroblastoma. I enjoyed the examples Daniel included in his post and analyzing his perspective on good writing.
Daniel reflected on his own personal experience on the book "My Sisters Keeper" in order to support his view point on good writing. I like how he mentioned how good writing should be something that your audience can relate to. Such as an emotional sense, like his experience with Justin, who was diagnosed with stage 4 neuroblastoma. I enjoyed the examples Daniel included in his post and analyzing his perspective on good writing.
Self Study Assignment:
The goal of the writing self study project was to learn a variety of writing styles and strategies, as well as recognizing the difference between well skilled and poor strategies. By analyzing myself, I was able to see strengths and weaknesses of my writing techniques.
Self Study Data:
The goal of the writing self study project was to learn a variety of writing styles and strategies, as well as recognizing the difference between well skilled and poor strategies. By analyzing myself, I was able to see strengths and weaknesses of my writing techniques.
Self Study Data:
![Picture](/uploads/4/2/6/9/42692587/4453574_orig.jpg)
Writing Self Study Draft 1:
Knowledge of your own writing habits and practices has great importance for when trying to improve your writing outcomes. But, how do you identify this personal information? In order to recognize your own writing habits, you must observe the way you study, absorb, analyze, and communicate the information obtained. In order to make desired changes, it's common for writers to find it helpful when tracing their own writing. Within this essay, I will present to you the findings of my self-study project. In addition to the methodology, I will provide three authors that represent my study.
In order to recognize my writing habits over time, I took note of every time I did writing or reading related work within one week. Throughout these seven days, I kept track of my data in an observation log, which held columns that allowed me to fill in the activities I did on an hourly basis. These columns required the following information: date, name of activity, intensity, affect, productivity, media used, and any interrupting factors during the task. Underneath the intensity (how hard I concentrated), affect (how good I did), and productivity (how much I completed) columns, I ranked my feelings toward the task on a scale of 1-5. Within one week, I completed a total of seventeen study hours, on average two/three a day. Out of those seventeen hours, nine were ranked 4-5 in the intensity, affect, and productivity columns. According to my data, the high scores were related to one or all of following: task completed after a good workout, after a good meal, and interest in subject. Factors such as time and temperature did not effect my work ethic. Due to anxiety, I found my work unsuccessful if I tried to complete it before exercise. If I didn't eat at least three hours prior to the task, I couldn't concentrate. This may or may not be a problem for other students.
Everyone has their own reading and writing strategies. Perl, a researcher of writing, gave a detailed explanation about one of the five unskilled writers that she studied. In relation to my study, Perl used graphs and tables to catch his writing performance. “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). Perl proved that even though certain writers are less skilled than others, everyone is practicing an original and complex writing routine. Although Tony and I use different strategies, we are both working to be successful in the writing process regardless of how skilled we are. Perl also included the point of teaching composing, “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). By this, Perl clarifies how it's essential to recognize every step of the writing process. In order to do so, you must look back and analyze how the routine was created.
According to Prior, a professor who researched writing, thinks it's important to trace and analyze your own writing habits. “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, 493). Prior represents my study because we both emphasized the importance of tracking your personal history. I am different from Prior because he focused on where texts come from and I focused on my study habits. Prior was helpful to my study because he strived to demonstrate a system of strategies used in writing, thus making me compare my writing strategies to his.
After reading Mike Rose's text, “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Shifting of Language,” I am able to identify how his point represents my study. After evaluating 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. The group of undergraduate students had two groups: five that suffered from writers block, known as “blockers,” and five known as “un-blockers.” Rose described 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). While collecting data for my study, I noticed that the low scores were due to anxiety. It wasn't about how skilled I was at the reading or writing task, it was about my emotions. Students that suffered from anxiety, insecurity, etc., in Rose's study could have been great writers and/or readers, but found it difficult to complete their tasks due to the same issue as me.
Before observing my writing and reading habits, I had no idea what made it difficult for me to study. I didn't realize that if I tried to concentrate on a U.S history discussion post at 8:00 p.m on an empty stomach, I would struggle. Or if I tried to read an article in my ENC 1101 book before exercise, I would struggle. Instead of getting worked up while trying to complete an assignment, I am able to recognize what will improve my productivity. I feel like after tracing my habits, readers will be inspired to observe theirs and improve their reading and writing methods. My study may open up the eyes of those who struggle to complete tasks before working out or on an empty stomach, or to those who are unaware of the benefits of tracing study habits.
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 13.4 (1979): 317-36. Print.
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.
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.
Peer Reviews:
Mostly inspired by the the black and underlined writing below, I made great changes to my paper. The opinions from my peers contributed to the success of my paper such as removing extra works that aren't needed, expanding on specific self study data, adding more detail, better organization, revised lit review, and so on.
1. Elizabeth Shirey (9/19/14):
Berkley, Overall your essay looks pretty well written, when reading it for the first time I noticed some slight grammatical errors in your introduction, which made the sentence flow choppy. Try rereading your introduction paragraph and taking out the extra words that aren’t really needed. As for your thesis, which read “According to my data, the high scores were related to one or all of following: task completed after a good workout, after a good meal, and interest in subject. Factors such as time and temperature did not effect my work ethic. Due to anxiety, I found my work unsuccessful if I tried to complete it before exercise. If I didn't eat at least three hours prior to the task, I couldn't concentrate.” It did a good job illustrating your observations and discoveries, I would suggest changing “…meal, and interest…” to “…meal, or interest…”. In the terms of organization, I will say that I think better organization of your essay would help its overall flow. I would suggest that you place you the lit review immediately following the introduction paragraph, following that your results analysis, and then last your conclusion. You presented your results in a very short and simple manner. I would suggest that you go back and add direct citations from your research to your essay. The way you interpreted the evidence was good, but try explaining more about how this will help you. Don’t be afraid to use detail.As the reader I was interested in what you had to say, yet I would suggest that you state how other people can use your findings in relation to their own habits. The last sentence was really good in that regard. I think you should take time to revise your lit review as it is extensive and not all necessary. By revising and shortening your lit review you should be able to further elaborate on the research and discoveries you made throughout the study. Adding dates and times from the research to the paper is a really good way to help the reader understand your research and findings. -Liz
2. Joseph Walker (9/19/14):
Berkley, I enjoyed reading your paper because it covered your methodology section well as well as the literature review. I couldn’t find the thesis although I have an idea where it could have been. I would put your thesis at the end of the first paragraph and mention why your study is important and the benefits of knowing what your writing habits are. The organization of your essay is set up well, but is missing some data. In the rubric under the introduction section (25 pts) it says to cover methodology, lit review, and a niche which you did very well. However, you need to expand more on the why and so what’s and specific data rather than just the general, overall picture. Evidence of your study was mentioned but I believe it could go into a bit more detail because you’re literature review happens to cover more than the data itself. You did everything else well because I felt engaged when reading and I felt like I was the audience. I specifically liked your methodology section because it covered in exact detail what your study was about. If you apply what you did in regards to writing with your literature review and methodology to elaborate on your specific findings, you will have written a great paper. From, Joe Walker
Writing Self Study Final Draft (9/22/14):
Knowledge of your own writing habits and practices has great importance when trying to improve your writing outcomes. But, how do you identify this personal information? In order to recognize your own writing habits, you must observe the way you study, absorb, analyze, and communicate the information obtained. In order to make desired changes, it's common for writers to find it helpful when tracing their own writing. Within this essay, I will present to you the findings of my self-study project. In addition to the methodology, I will provide three authors that represent my study. Through my self-study I was able to see my ups and downs in the writing process and relate my data to other authors in order to get a better understanding of my habits.
In order to recognize my writing habits over time, I took note of every time I did writing or reading related work within one week. Throughout these seven days, I kept track of my data in an observation log, which held columns that allowed me to fill in the activities I did on an hourly basis. These columns required the following information: date, name of activity, intensity, affect, productivity, media used, and any interrupting factors during the task. Underneath the intensity (how hard I concentrated), affect (how good I did), and productivity (how much I completed) columns, I ranked my feelings toward the task on a scale of 1-5. Within one week, I completed a total of seventeen study hours, on average two/three a day. Out of those seventeen hours, nine were ranked 4-5 in the intensity, affect, and productivity columns. According to my data, the high scores were related to one or all of following: task completed after a good workout, after a good meal, or interest in subject. Factors such as time and temperature did not effect my work ethic. Due to anxiety, I found my work unsuccessful if I tried to complete it before exercise. If I didn't eat at least three hours prior to the task, I couldn't concentrate. This may or may not be a problem for other students.
Everyone has their own reading and writing strategies. Perl, a researcher of writing, gave a detailed explanation about one of the five unskilled writers that she studied. In relation to my study, Perl used graphs and tables to catch his writing performance. “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). Perl proved that even though certain writers are less skilled than others, everyone is practicing an original and complex writing routine. Although Tony and I use different strategies, we are both working to be successful in the writing process regardless of how skilled we are. Perl also included the point of teaching composing, “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). By this, Perl clarifies how it's essential to recognize every step of the writing process. In order to do so, you must look back and analyze how the routine was created.
According to Prior, a professor who researched writing, thinks it's important to trace and analyze your own writing habits. “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, 493). Prior represents my study because we both emphasized the importance of tracking your personal history. I am different from Prior because he focused on where texts come from and I focused on my study habits. Prior was helpful to my study because he strived to demonstrate a system of strategies used in writing, thus making me compare my writing strategies to his.
After reading Mike Rose's text, “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Shifting of Language,” I am able to identify how his point represents my study. After evaluating 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. The group of undergraduate students had two groups: five that suffered from writers block, known as “blockers,” and five known as “un-blockers.” Rose described 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). While collecting data for my study, I noticed that the low scores were due to anxiety. It wasn't about how skilled I was at the reading or writing task, it was about my emotions. Students that suffered from anxiety, insecurity, etc., in Rose's study could have been great writers and/or readers, but found it difficult to complete their tasks due to the same issue as me.
Before observing my writing and reading habits, I had no idea what made it difficult for me to study. I didn't realize that if I tried to concentrate on a U.S history discussion post at 8:00 p.m on an empty stomach, I would struggle. Or if I tried to read an article in my ENC 1101 book before exercise, I would struggle. Instead of getting worked up while trying to complete an assignment, I am able to recognize what will improve my productivity. I feel like after tracing my habits, readers will be inspired to observe theirs and improve their reading and writing methods. My study may open up the eyes of those who struggle to complete tasks before working out or on an empty stomach, or to those who are unaware of the benefits of tracing study habits.
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 13.4 (1979): 317-36. Print.
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.
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.
Writing Process Reflection:
Within the first unit of class, we were supposed to study writing in general. Basically, 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. The most difficult part of this unit was definitely creating my final draft of the Writing Process paper. Although I felt confident with the previous discussion posts and readings, I felt uneasy trying to create my final draft of the paper.
I feel like it was much easier to read a text, analyze and summarize it, than to write a paper based off of my own data and rubric. I think the easiest concept to grab was Anne Lamott's, “Shitty First Drafts,” which made me feel better about my writing strategies. I don't feel like I struggled with discussion posts or any of the authors we analyzed, but I do feel like I would've felt better if we had a rubric telling us what order to put everything in for the final Writing Process paper. When I submitted my paper, I knew that I used the strategies learned from previous discussions but still didn't feel confident with the way the paper was set up. Although my final draft might not be perfect, I genuinely enjoyed the first unit of this class and appreciate all I have learned. Compared to the beginning of class, I feel like I have developed strategies that will carry with me when writing in the future.
Knowledge of your own writing habits and practices has great importance for when trying to improve your writing outcomes. But, how do you identify this personal information? In order to recognize your own writing habits, you must observe the way you study, absorb, analyze, and communicate the information obtained. In order to make desired changes, it's common for writers to find it helpful when tracing their own writing. Within this essay, I will present to you the findings of my self-study project. In addition to the methodology, I will provide three authors that represent my study.
In order to recognize my writing habits over time, I took note of every time I did writing or reading related work within one week. Throughout these seven days, I kept track of my data in an observation log, which held columns that allowed me to fill in the activities I did on an hourly basis. These columns required the following information: date, name of activity, intensity, affect, productivity, media used, and any interrupting factors during the task. Underneath the intensity (how hard I concentrated), affect (how good I did), and productivity (how much I completed) columns, I ranked my feelings toward the task on a scale of 1-5. Within one week, I completed a total of seventeen study hours, on average two/three a day. Out of those seventeen hours, nine were ranked 4-5 in the intensity, affect, and productivity columns. According to my data, the high scores were related to one or all of following: task completed after a good workout, after a good meal, and interest in subject. Factors such as time and temperature did not effect my work ethic. Due to anxiety, I found my work unsuccessful if I tried to complete it before exercise. If I didn't eat at least three hours prior to the task, I couldn't concentrate. This may or may not be a problem for other students.
Everyone has their own reading and writing strategies. Perl, a researcher of writing, gave a detailed explanation about one of the five unskilled writers that she studied. In relation to my study, Perl used graphs and tables to catch his writing performance. “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). Perl proved that even though certain writers are less skilled than others, everyone is practicing an original and complex writing routine. Although Tony and I use different strategies, we are both working to be successful in the writing process regardless of how skilled we are. Perl also included the point of teaching composing, “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). By this, Perl clarifies how it's essential to recognize every step of the writing process. In order to do so, you must look back and analyze how the routine was created.
According to Prior, a professor who researched writing, thinks it's important to trace and analyze your own writing habits. “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, 493). Prior represents my study because we both emphasized the importance of tracking your personal history. I am different from Prior because he focused on where texts come from and I focused on my study habits. Prior was helpful to my study because he strived to demonstrate a system of strategies used in writing, thus making me compare my writing strategies to his.
After reading Mike Rose's text, “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Shifting of Language,” I am able to identify how his point represents my study. After evaluating 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. The group of undergraduate students had two groups: five that suffered from writers block, known as “blockers,” and five known as “un-blockers.” Rose described 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). While collecting data for my study, I noticed that the low scores were due to anxiety. It wasn't about how skilled I was at the reading or writing task, it was about my emotions. Students that suffered from anxiety, insecurity, etc., in Rose's study could have been great writers and/or readers, but found it difficult to complete their tasks due to the same issue as me.
Before observing my writing and reading habits, I had no idea what made it difficult for me to study. I didn't realize that if I tried to concentrate on a U.S history discussion post at 8:00 p.m on an empty stomach, I would struggle. Or if I tried to read an article in my ENC 1101 book before exercise, I would struggle. Instead of getting worked up while trying to complete an assignment, I am able to recognize what will improve my productivity. I feel like after tracing my habits, readers will be inspired to observe theirs and improve their reading and writing methods. My study may open up the eyes of those who struggle to complete tasks before working out or on an empty stomach, or to those who are unaware of the benefits of tracing study habits.
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 13.4 (1979): 317-36. Print.
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.
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.
Peer Reviews:
Mostly inspired by the the black and underlined writing below, I made great changes to my paper. The opinions from my peers contributed to the success of my paper such as removing extra works that aren't needed, expanding on specific self study data, adding more detail, better organization, revised lit review, and so on.
1. Elizabeth Shirey (9/19/14):
Berkley, Overall your essay looks pretty well written, when reading it for the first time I noticed some slight grammatical errors in your introduction, which made the sentence flow choppy. Try rereading your introduction paragraph and taking out the extra words that aren’t really needed. As for your thesis, which read “According to my data, the high scores were related to one or all of following: task completed after a good workout, after a good meal, and interest in subject. Factors such as time and temperature did not effect my work ethic. Due to anxiety, I found my work unsuccessful if I tried to complete it before exercise. If I didn't eat at least three hours prior to the task, I couldn't concentrate.” It did a good job illustrating your observations and discoveries, I would suggest changing “…meal, and interest…” to “…meal, or interest…”. In the terms of organization, I will say that I think better organization of your essay would help its overall flow. I would suggest that you place you the lit review immediately following the introduction paragraph, following that your results analysis, and then last your conclusion. You presented your results in a very short and simple manner. I would suggest that you go back and add direct citations from your research to your essay. The way you interpreted the evidence was good, but try explaining more about how this will help you. Don’t be afraid to use detail.As the reader I was interested in what you had to say, yet I would suggest that you state how other people can use your findings in relation to their own habits. The last sentence was really good in that regard. I think you should take time to revise your lit review as it is extensive and not all necessary. By revising and shortening your lit review you should be able to further elaborate on the research and discoveries you made throughout the study. Adding dates and times from the research to the paper is a really good way to help the reader understand your research and findings. -Liz
2. Joseph Walker (9/19/14):
Berkley, I enjoyed reading your paper because it covered your methodology section well as well as the literature review. I couldn’t find the thesis although I have an idea where it could have been. I would put your thesis at the end of the first paragraph and mention why your study is important and the benefits of knowing what your writing habits are. The organization of your essay is set up well, but is missing some data. In the rubric under the introduction section (25 pts) it says to cover methodology, lit review, and a niche which you did very well. However, you need to expand more on the why and so what’s and specific data rather than just the general, overall picture. Evidence of your study was mentioned but I believe it could go into a bit more detail because you’re literature review happens to cover more than the data itself. You did everything else well because I felt engaged when reading and I felt like I was the audience. I specifically liked your methodology section because it covered in exact detail what your study was about. If you apply what you did in regards to writing with your literature review and methodology to elaborate on your specific findings, you will have written a great paper. From, Joe Walker
Writing Self Study Final Draft (9/22/14):
Knowledge of your own writing habits and practices has great importance when trying to improve your writing outcomes. But, how do you identify this personal information? In order to recognize your own writing habits, you must observe the way you study, absorb, analyze, and communicate the information obtained. In order to make desired changes, it's common for writers to find it helpful when tracing their own writing. Within this essay, I will present to you the findings of my self-study project. In addition to the methodology, I will provide three authors that represent my study. Through my self-study I was able to see my ups and downs in the writing process and relate my data to other authors in order to get a better understanding of my habits.
In order to recognize my writing habits over time, I took note of every time I did writing or reading related work within one week. Throughout these seven days, I kept track of my data in an observation log, which held columns that allowed me to fill in the activities I did on an hourly basis. These columns required the following information: date, name of activity, intensity, affect, productivity, media used, and any interrupting factors during the task. Underneath the intensity (how hard I concentrated), affect (how good I did), and productivity (how much I completed) columns, I ranked my feelings toward the task on a scale of 1-5. Within one week, I completed a total of seventeen study hours, on average two/three a day. Out of those seventeen hours, nine were ranked 4-5 in the intensity, affect, and productivity columns. According to my data, the high scores were related to one or all of following: task completed after a good workout, after a good meal, or interest in subject. Factors such as time and temperature did not effect my work ethic. Due to anxiety, I found my work unsuccessful if I tried to complete it before exercise. If I didn't eat at least three hours prior to the task, I couldn't concentrate. This may or may not be a problem for other students.
Everyone has their own reading and writing strategies. Perl, a researcher of writing, gave a detailed explanation about one of the five unskilled writers that she studied. In relation to my study, Perl used graphs and tables to catch his writing performance. “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). Perl proved that even though certain writers are less skilled than others, everyone is practicing an original and complex writing routine. Although Tony and I use different strategies, we are both working to be successful in the writing process regardless of how skilled we are. Perl also included the point of teaching composing, “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). By this, Perl clarifies how it's essential to recognize every step of the writing process. In order to do so, you must look back and analyze how the routine was created.
According to Prior, a professor who researched writing, thinks it's important to trace and analyze your own writing habits. “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, 493). Prior represents my study because we both emphasized the importance of tracking your personal history. I am different from Prior because he focused on where texts come from and I focused on my study habits. Prior was helpful to my study because he strived to demonstrate a system of strategies used in writing, thus making me compare my writing strategies to his.
After reading Mike Rose's text, “Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Shifting of Language,” I am able to identify how his point represents my study. After evaluating 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. The group of undergraduate students had two groups: five that suffered from writers block, known as “blockers,” and five known as “un-blockers.” Rose described 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). While collecting data for my study, I noticed that the low scores were due to anxiety. It wasn't about how skilled I was at the reading or writing task, it was about my emotions. Students that suffered from anxiety, insecurity, etc., in Rose's study could have been great writers and/or readers, but found it difficult to complete their tasks due to the same issue as me.
Before observing my writing and reading habits, I had no idea what made it difficult for me to study. I didn't realize that if I tried to concentrate on a U.S history discussion post at 8:00 p.m on an empty stomach, I would struggle. Or if I tried to read an article in my ENC 1101 book before exercise, I would struggle. Instead of getting worked up while trying to complete an assignment, I am able to recognize what will improve my productivity. I feel like after tracing my habits, readers will be inspired to observe theirs and improve their reading and writing methods. My study may open up the eyes of those who struggle to complete tasks before working out or on an empty stomach, or to those who are unaware of the benefits of tracing study habits.
Perl, Sondra. “The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 13.4 (1979): 317-36. Print.
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.
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.
Writing Process Reflection:
Within the first unit of class, we were supposed to study writing in general. Basically, 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. The most difficult part of this unit was definitely creating my final draft of the Writing Process paper. Although I felt confident with the previous discussion posts and readings, I felt uneasy trying to create my final draft of the paper.
I feel like it was much easier to read a text, analyze and summarize it, than to write a paper based off of my own data and rubric. I think the easiest concept to grab was Anne Lamott's, “Shitty First Drafts,” which made me feel better about my writing strategies. I don't feel like I struggled with discussion posts or any of the authors we analyzed, but I do feel like I would've felt better if we had a rubric telling us what order to put everything in for the final Writing Process paper. When I submitted my paper, I knew that I used the strategies learned from previous discussions but still didn't feel confident with the way the paper was set up. Although my final draft might not be perfect, I genuinely enjoyed the first unit of this class and appreciate all I have learned. Compared to the beginning of class, I feel like I have developed strategies that will carry with me when writing in the future.