I enjoyed this article as I found it much easier to read then Britton. I love the idea that kids work, learn, and process in nontraditional ways. In our class discussion I think there was some confusion upon what the author was trying to convey. I don’t think she was stating that the structure of a given genera should be altered or changed. I think she was saying is that the way the final product is produced doesn’t necessarily need to follow a formula or a guide. I think that teaching all the different tools in the tool box is important, and your students should be able to manipulate those given tools, but when writing, your students should be allowed to pick the tools they want to use in order to complete a piece of writing. Giving our students the chance to prewrite, brainstorm, web, or outline etc. in the fashion that best suits them, in order to create a final product.
I like lists. Lists are a useful device for me in my everyday life. With that said, I like her lists of the 7 “how it is” teaching writing techniques and her 7 “how it should be” techniques. They are easy to read and easy to follow. Straight forward and to the point…transactional I might suppose?? J
In order to move from the “how it is” to the “how it should be” teaching minds must change. A large paradigm shift is necessary for the “how it should be” to take root and flourish.
Becky, I could tell that your writing was happier when you wrote about Emig - almost like a sigh of relief. I enjoyed the article also for the same reasons you did. Hear, here ;-) to being able to understand something without having a brain aneurysm. Geri
ReplyDelete