Teaching Writing

"Construction Sight"

Dr. Paul Thomas raised a very interesting, and somewhat disturbing, notion during one of my first Education seminars. He stated that learning how to write is one thing; learning how to teach writing is quite another, and it’s often more complex than people think. For it involves substantially more than simply giving students pointers on how to write a thesis statement, correcting their grammatical mistakes, or showing them the “basic” five-paragraph model for an essay (one practice that is not so subtly criticized throughout the majority of my summer reading).

It’s about helping them to think, and to think about thinking, acquiring an enhanced awareness of themselves, their abilities, and their mental faculties (the process that Dr. Thomas terms metacognition), and thereby discovering their “voice” in writing. It’s about encouraging them to challenge pre-conceptions both about the subject material, and the perspective from which they approach it. It’s about pushing, challenging them. It’s about moving beyond the world of the created to the realm of the subjective in which there are less absolutes – and more opportunities for growth spurts (p. 45).

Such is the constructivist point of view that the book promotes. By now, I have become quite familiar with this philosophy thanks in part to the rest of my summer reading books. In all honesty, the appeal of constructivism is so inviting that I find it appalling how we as teachers could have wandered so far away from, as it is described, the core of learning.

I am particularly in favor of Dr. Thomas’ suggestions for how to teach students to write – and enjoy writing. Writing in groups (p. 35) when feasible gives students a wider range of perspectives for present and future reference (provided there is an adult serving as mediator), and it also gives them a certain comfort level in sharing their ideas with others their own age. And I don’t believe sharing of ideas constitutes cheating – certainly not in a group activity for an in-class assignment. Now for a research paper, I would try to make certain that my students understood that an idea they picked up from another student or source should be properly cited (I would distinguish between that and the suggestions other students provide when editing their peers’ work (p. 37); another practice that I would probably endorse).

I also favor making students write as early and often as possible (p. 36). However – and I would be adamant on this – I believe the idea would only work if I take the time to distinguish the writing assignments with varying aspects, or “identities” as it were. For instance, I might start out by assigning my students a persuasive essay on their summer reading (i.e., convince me why Bernard’s actions make him a sympathetic character in Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World). Four weeks later, I’d have them submit an informative paper (i.e., explain how the details of Sophie’s World might influence a person to embrace any given philosophy). I feel that students need exposure to all the different ways to write an essay or a research paper, and they need to learn the cues that will call on them to respond in a required form for the paper (analyze, describe, evaluate, synthesize, compare, contrast, inform, assess). And yes, that also means breaking away from the traditional five-paragraph essay form if necessary; I would not abandon it as a helpful guide for struggling writers, but that’s no reason to make it a binding format. It ultimately works to the detriment of the work students are capable of producing given a little (or in some cases, a lot) of freedom to respond creatively as well as authentically.