R2 Rewriting: A Move to Theorize

Considering the basic research assignment, the most important move a writer can make is that of theorizing. Emerging writers often focus on the task of gathering data, whether it serve the purpose of illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, or limiting. They find themselves lost in a sea of notes and sources, gripping at what they perceive as the strongest quotations to pull them through the assignment. What seems to fall out of place in this entire process is that of theorizing, or developing the controlling idea. At the very center of research writing is the thesis statement, and very few students I have encountered take the time to determine that critically important concept before consulting other texts for support. The issue arises because in order to take a strong stance on an issue, the writer must first be familiar with it. This, in and of itself, requires research, reading at the very least. A thorough understanding of the situation must first be established, and from that understanding comes the thesis, which may be to counter an established line of thinking or even to forward several and combine them into one. Regardless, the bulk of the research paper composition should stem from the thesis as the writer’s thought process buttressed by quotations and paraphrases to lend credibility. Only after establishing the thesis should the writer assesses texts to come to terms and forward or counter as he or she sees fit. The move to theorize must come first.

Missing this move results in a dead paper. Take, for example, a former student who asked me to review his research paper before submission. He had composed a fifteen-page essay elaborately describing a fascinating video game. Page after page, the essay outlined in detail the main character’s saga and exploits, motivation, background, shortcomings, love interests, etc. The essay was essentially a summary. Did he complete the research process? I can’t say that he did—he neglected to determine the purpose of his paper, which must happen before composing begins. He had nothing to prove, no thesis statement. He did make an attempt to assert that the theme song suited the game, but the analysis did not follow, nor did the research regarding the historical and cultural context, which would have granted some credence to his paper. For this essay, I would recreate the “Tracking Influences” assignment from Rewriting. “Tracking Analysis” would be my title, and I would have him highlight analysis, as the original assignment requires, and in the margin, have him write how the analysis proved his thesis. He would see clearly that the analysis was not present and that he could write nothing in the margin because the thesis did not exist. That would be a valuable, eye-opening experience, and it would lead to a true research paper. Above all, the need to theorize would become crystal clear.

Harris, Joseph. Rewriting. Logan: Utah State University Press, 2006. Print.

 

r1: E110 Course Goals and Practices

After reading through the E110 Goals and Practices, the majority appeared to be what we as educators consider “best practices.” However, any teacher of writer would acknowledge that most academic writing is more complex than it sounds. The majority of the goals were clearly stated, thus, I will not mention them to save time; however, several could use more clarification or could be a bit difficult with my students.

In terms of goals, to “research the various perspectives on a question or topic and contribute to the scholarly conversation about it” could present a challenge to my students. As I read this statement, I automatically made a connection to the move of countering as detailed in Rewriting, since it is not enough to select one side of a debate; instead, the writer must look through a lens beyond the debate to uncover another perspective. Really, the challenge begins in instilling the significance of “various perspectives” in their research as they often fall into vacuum of what only fits into their thesis. In turn, they must use these perspectives to push beyond the debate in order to join the scholarly conversation. Unfortunately, too often is the case that choosing and defending a side is as far as students are pushed.

As for practices, “Write frequently, write for different audiences, and write pieces of varying length and complexity” seemed quite open-ended. For instance, it seems the generic high school English course is built around argumentative and informative writing thanks largely in part to the Common Core Standards, so in order to bridge the course, I want to make sure analysis and argument are included, and ideally, narrative writing could fit as a starting piece if it is not deemed too simplistic for such a course. In terms of planning, it seems imperative to begin with the writing pieces first; therefore, the expectation for type and amount will be helpful.

Next, for “Participate as a member of a community of writers,” I not only understand it, but I want to see it further. Although this practice seems more related to the process of group-workshop in class with collaboration and constructive criticism of peer writing, how much should occur online? Also, in our ENG 668, everyone is expected to read and respond to one another since we have three students and one instructor, but what is the expectation when there is a class of twenty-plus? In addition, since this is a college-level writing class, I would like to hold outside-of-class writing conferences as well since I can still remember the impact time spent conferencing during a professor’s “office hours” had on my own writing. However, what are the limits to this? Can I require each student to meet with me out of class a specified amount of time? Is it up to my individual school? What do you suggest?

Finally, “Reflect on your aims and strategies as a writer” seemed the most vague in terms of the expectation. However, after reading Rewriting, I envisioned this to be a meta-cognitive piece similar to when Harris expands upon “Coming to Terms” in “Projects” when the writer goes back through their own writing to see if they can write a paragraph or two in which they describe how the essay as it stands (Rewriting 32-33). Adding this new layer to the writing process will certainly challenge my students, especially since they will be forced to define their own project, which very few take the time to do or even consider. If there is more they need to do in terms of reflection, I would be open to additional ideas to consistently implement this reflective piece. My students already keep traditional portfolios; however, I believe more consistent reflection on past pieces could be helpful.

Though the majority of the document makes complete sense, feedback on these few questions will be extremely helpful as I continue to plan and lay out the course.

R1 The Need for Ruminating

Anne Marie Eanes

R1 Rewriting

             What struck me initially as I read Rewriting was how vital each of the moves of coming to terms, forwarding, countering, and taking an approach would be to the development of confident and effective writers. I especially enjoyed the explanation of the importance of incorporating direct quotations in a way that will focus the attention on how the writer is utilizing an author’s work to express his or her own point. Too often students don’t fully understand that quotations can’t do the work for them in their essays. I try to stress with my students the importance of incorporating quotations to validate a point that they themselves have made about their topic and whenever possible to then take the comment made by that cited author one step further by expanding upon the author’s original observation.   To be honest I have never really thought about the efficacy of considering and asking the students to explain the basis of the author’s point of view as well as their own perspective.   I was also intrigued by the section on tracking revisions. I have often lamented that my students seem to be reluctant to substantially revise their writing. In fact, it sometimes seems as if they do not even devote sufficient time to proofreading what they have written to eliminate obvious grammatical and/or mechanical errors. Going through the process of visually tracking the revisions would be a wonderful way to empower the students to make significant revisions to their work. This would be especially effective when used in conjunction with peer conferences. Sometimes the students seem to need the additional impetus of peer feedback to realize that their writing needs expansion or clarification.

In regard to proposing an additional movement to the ones already delineated, I would suggest a preliminary move that must precede the stated ones. Perhaps there is an expectation at the collegiate level that students have already mastered my proposed move. However, in my experience with high school students, I have discovered that it cannot be assumed that they have honed this skill. The move I would like to suggest is ruminating. A student needs to fully experience and ponder the ideas within a text before he or she can truly formulate coherent and essential comments about it. Frequently students don’t even read a literary work or non-fiction prose selection completely before they try to write an analytical essay on the work. They resort to reading SparkNotes or other summaries of the text instead of immersing themselves in the experience of interacting with the entire piece. Because they have not solidified their own thoughts on the text, it makes the task of selecting appropriate sources to enhance their own ideas more difficult. The process of ruminating more deeply about the text will also give the students an opportunity to reflect on their own perspective as they approach the task. Understanding their own perspective may help them to seek out sources that will either have a similar perspective or will offer a totally different point of view. Adding this step at the beginning of the process will lay a stronger foundation for the remaining moves.

To Do: Weeks 1 & 2

1. Mon, 6/16: Create a WordPress.com account. Email me the address you used in setting up that account. I will then invite you to be an Author on this site.
2. Mon, 6/16, 2:00 pm: Dan, Katrina, and Joe meet  in 134 Memorial. Please read through the materials on this site and as much of Rewriting as possible.
3. Tues, 6/17, 11:59 pm: Post Response 1 to this site.
4. Thurs, 6/19, 11:59 pm: Post Comments 1 to this site.
5. Mon, 6/23, 11:00 am: Anne Marie and Joe meet in 134 Memorial.