ENG
410 Article/Book Reviews
Spring 2007
Note: Transferring text frequently causes the loss of
formatting.
While I have attempted to catch the more obvious ones (like paragraph
breaks),
the point of posting the material to the web is to make it accessible,
not "perfect."
Articles are ordered by student, alphabetically, on this page, but
alphabetized
citations below are linked to the specific reviews.
Atwell, Nancie. Lessons That Change Writers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann
Educational Productions.
2002
Culham,
Ruth. "The Trait Lady Speaks Up." Educational
Leadership 64.2 (2006): 53-57. Academic
Search Premier. 4 March 2007. http://search.ebscohost.com.
Fletcher, Ralph. Breathing
In, Breathing Out.
Harris,
Karen R., Steve Graham, and Linda H. Mason, eds. “Improving the
Writing, Knowledge, and Motivation of Struggling
Young Writers: Effects of Self-Regulated Strategy Development With and
Without Peer
Support.” American Education Research
Journal 43:2 (Summer 2006):
295-338. ProQuest. Western Kentucky University Library, 17 February 2007 <
http://proquest.umi.com.libsrv.wku.edu/pqdlink?>.
Hillocks Jr.,
George. The Focus on Form vs. Content in
Teaching
Writing. Research in the Teaching of
English. Volume 40: Number 2, Urbana:
Illinois, 2005.
Kohn,
Alfie. (2006) The Trouble with Rubrics. English Journal, 95(4).
Retrieved March 28, 2006,
from
http://www.englishjournal.colostate.edu/Extensions/EJ0954Speaking.pdf.
Langer,
Judith A. (2002) Effective Literacy Instruction: Building
Successful Reading
and Writing Programs. New
York:
National Council of Teachers of English.
O’Day, Kim.
(1994). Using Formal and Informal Writing
in Middle School Social Studies. Retrieved February 22,
2007 from http:// members.ncss.org/se/5801/580113. html.
Weaver, C. Teaching
Grammar in Context. Portsmouth, NH:
Boynton/Cook, 1996
Zinsser, William “Inventing The Truth The Art
and Craft
of Memoir”. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1995.
Joanna
Busse
Culham,
Ruth. "The Trait Lady Speaks Up." Educational
Leadership 64.2 (2006): 53-57. Academic
Search Premier. 4 March 2007. http://search.ebscohost.com.
In Ruth Culham’s
article, “The Trait Lady Speaks Up,” she discusses the six traits of
writing
and debunks five popular myths concerning those traits. When she refers
to “the
trait lady,” she is referring to herself, having spent twenty years
advocating
and educating teachers about the traits.
The six traits are: ideas,
organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency, and convention. A
last
trait is added, which Culham calls the “+1” trait: presentation. The
traits,
Culham declares, “represent a language that empowers students and
teachers to
communicate about qualities of writing” (53). Since the traits only
“came into
being” twenty years ago (53), there are five myths Culham lists which
have
accompanied spreading knowledge of the traits.
The first myth is that “[t]he
traits are a writing curriculum” (53). This Culham outright
contradicts.
Although she cites the traits as an assessment tool and a basic
definition of
good writing, they address few of the technical aspects of writing,
brainstorming about a topic, and how to discern about the use of
sources. The
second myth is an idea that “the writing process and the traits are
different
things” (54). Culham debunks this by saying that rather than opposing
each
other, the writing process and the traits are basically “two sides of
the same
coin” (54). The writing process is a process in which a student
explores his
writing in the backdrop of the traits. Myth three addresses the thought
that
the traits are a program teachers must implement. As Culham states,
“they are a
model, not a program” (54). A program includes a curriculum, and Culham
has
already shot down the myth that the traits are a curriculum. So the
traits are
not a program either. Along those same
lines, myth four assumes that the traits, if taught, can replace the
act of
teaching writing. This they cannot do, since they do not address the
concepts
of revising, brainstorming, and the question of individual input, and
are not a
curriculum nor a program. Myth five goes completely off the deep end in
the
other direction, making the claim that “[t]he traits are not part of
writing
workshop” at all (55). As Culham says, “[i]n fact, the traits are the
language
of writing workshop” (55). Within the context of the workshop, the six
traits
are discussed and applied; writing workshop, in fact, would not exist
without
them. Thus the five myths concerning the six traits are debunked, and
the
traits enable all student writers to triumph in the end.
Culham’s article was interesting
because it introduced a previously unknown aspect to me: the six traits
of
writing. Plus one. On page 55 of her article, figure 1 is a rubrics
chart which
uses the traits to assess written works. This is a great tool not only
for the
educator and writer, in providing a rubrics chart to compare to, but
also in
demonstrating Culham’s point, that the traits are an assessment tool,
but
little more when we are discussing teaching and curriculum. Her reasoning concerning the traits leave
little room for disagreement, as it can be seen that most of the
arguments she
uses build upon each other. She demonstrates well how the traits can be
used in
the classroom, though not replacing a program or curriculum, since they
are not
that, but as a supplement and a foundation for the improvement of
writing.
Laura Knight
Book Review “Breathing
In, Breathing Out
“Breathing
In, Breathing Out” by Ralph Fletcher is a book that gives advice to
both new
and old writers. It gives guidelines to
go by to help one find their inner voice.
In this book Fletcher researches the different usages of keeping
a
writers notebook and how the effects of this can be useful for writers
to avoid
blockage and to open up their minds and expand their ideas.
Keeping a
journal as I like to call it, or a “writer’s notebook” is a safe haven
for
ideas. Keeping a notebook of ideas is
helpful because in your writing thoughts and feelings can be expanded
and
changed. Notebooks are supposed to give
a writer a peaceful place to work out their thoughts and feelings and
help
their ideas grow and flourish.
Fletcher
describes keeping a journal as a better way to keep writing structured. Writing thoughts down keeps them more
organized. In the first chapter titled “A Place to
Write” it talks about writing in a
comfortable setting. In class we have
discussed getting “into the zone” and this is what this chapter
reminded me
of. To get yourself into the
zone a
comfortable place to write is essential.
Finding that place is the first step in helping writers in
finding their
voice. When you find a place where you
can feel comfort and inspiration it helps thoughts and ideas flow more
easily
through the mind.
The next
few chapters in this book talk about what moves one as a person. These chapters discussed writing on something
that spawns passion. It is much easier
to write about something that we are passionate about than something we
are
not.
This book
was about how to find an inner voice in our writing and how to improve
that
voice. I found it a great easy read and
liked the suggestions on how to get into the zone.
Overall
this book could be very helpful for a writer who needs a little
inspiration. This book could be used as
a guideline for writers block. It had
good advice on how to connect to with our inner selves to better help
our
writing skills.
Leigh
Morin
Kohn,
Alfie. (2006) The Trouble with Rubrics. English Journal, 95(4).
Retrieved March 28, 2006,
from
http://www.englishjournal.colostate.edu/Extensions/EJ0954Speaking.pdf.
This
article starts out with the author, Alfie Kohn, describing his own
false
impressions of “the two” forms of assessment: crude letter grades
versus
portfolios and rubrics. He, like many
professionals in the education system today, assumed that the new
approach was
much better than the old system simply because it was purported to give
educators, students, and parents more information regarding the
students'
performance. As he researched this topic
further, Kohn came across one article, “Understanding Rubrics,” by
Heidi
Andrade. In her article, she explained
that “rubrics make assessing student work quick and efficient, and they
help
teachers justify to parents and others the grades that they assign to
students.” Kohn's immediate response to
this was,
“Uh-oh.”
Kohn
explains why this statement worried him in the following paragraphs. “Something that's commended to teachers as a
handy strategy of self-justification...doesn't seem particularly
promising for
inviting teachers to improve their practices.”
Also, although the goal of the people who tout portfolios and
rubrics is
supposedly to eliminate grades, this simply provides them an easy way
to
“legitimate grades by offering a new way to derive them.”
Finally, Kohn mulls over the “quick and efficient”
line, imagining teachers as “grading machines.”
The author
explains later in the article that some of the critics of rubrics say
that they
may never be able to deliver what they claim, and will eventually rely
on the
discretion of the teacher. However, Kohn
is more concerned with the prospect of the success of rubrics than
their
possible failures. “Just as it's
possible to raise standardized test scores as long as you're willing to
gut the
curriculum...so it's possible to get a bunch of people to agree on what
rating
to given an assignment as long as they're willing to accept and apply
someone
else's narrow criteria.”
Finally,
Kohn gets to what I believe is the heart of this piece: the effect
rubrics are
having on student writing. He cites an
article
by Linda Mabry that claims “compliance with the rubric tended to yield
higher
scores but produced 'vacuous' writing.”
This standardization of assessment may also lead to students'
inability
to write without detailed instructions.
According to the article, a Michigan teacher complained that
“her
students, presumably having grown accustomed to rubrics in other
classrooms,
now seemed 'unable to function unless every required item is spelled
out for
them in a grid and assigned a point value.'”
If the goal is to improve student writing, then rubrics may not
be the
best course of action. Teachers need to
reassess their own assessment, according to Kohn, “to make sure it's
consistent
with the reason we decided to go into teaching in the first place.”
While I
personally tend to achieve better results from my work when I know in
advance
what is expected from me, I understand now how some students'
creativity may
suffer from being given standards that are too precise.
Those students will, as a result of being
given a rubric, focus all of their attention on how well they are doing
instead
of what, how, or why they are doing the assigned writing.
It will stifle their creativity and cause
them to become more exact, but less interesting writers.
While rubrics can be used successfully when
mapping curriculum and planning units, they should not be used for any
and all
assignments.
Like
Kohn stated in his article, just because a new strategy for assessment
is
better than “the old way,” that doesn't necessarily make it authentic. Teachers need to use some of their own
creativity to try to find other methods for assessing students' work. If the old standards don't measure up, try
something new. However, if that doesn't
work effectively either, try something else.
In my own classes in the future, I will make sure to use a blend
of many
different styles of assessment, including the tried-and-true letter
grade
system, the “new and improved” rubric system, and other methods such as
student
peer grading and assessment based on creativity. The
key is for the teachers to not simply
rely on what the “experts” tell them.
They are the ones in the classrooms every day—it is up to them.
Scott Poe
Weaver, C. Teaching
Grammar in Context. Portsmouth, NH:
Boynton/Cook, 1996
In her
book, Weaver presents a philosophy by offering teachers practical ideas
for
teaching grammar in the context of student writings, as opposed to the
traditional, formal method of teaching parts, structures and
definitions in
isolation from student writing. The book
begins with a historical account of the traditional reasons for
teaching
grammar alone as a school subject, but then delivers a plethora of
research
suggesting that grammar taught in such a way is less effective than
teaching
grammar in the context of student writing.
In the
earlier chapters, as well as in later chapters that summarize
information from
earlier chapters, the author argues against teaching formal grammar in
schools. She presents a wealth of
research material to prove there is little to gain from teaching
grammar “as a
means of improving composition skills”(13).
Students find such instruction boring, and it appears to them as
little
more than tedious exercises, which “may be adequate if all that is
required is
that students pass a test, but the application of grammatical concepts
may
require cognitive understanding that is not so readily gained through
practice
exercises” (104). Research shows that
students are more inclined to retain information concerning stylistic
considerations when they are viewing the information in the context of
a piece
of writing they care about or that means something to them. She argues, “If schools insist upon teaching
the identification of parts of speech, the parsing or diagramming of
sentences,
or other concepts of traditional grammar (as many still do), they
cannot defend
it as a means of improving the quality of writing” (13).
In the next
section of the book, the author suggests alternatives to the formal
teaching of
grammar; that is, she presents guidelines for teaching grammar in the
context
of student writing and gives insight into ways to stress the piece of
writing
rather than the correction of errors, as “One of the problems with
overreacting
to errors is that it stunts our students’ growth as writers. Under pressure not to make mistakes, students
have often written less interesting pieces of writing” (81). Don’t rant on errors. Everyone
makes them. Instead, address errors during
the revision
and editing phases of writing instead of grading something that is not
a
complete piece of writing (one that has been through the drafting,
revision and
editing phases). One particular way, in
addition to the above, of helping students focus on writing more than
grades is
to offer publication opportunities for students, whether it is a
school,
community or national publication.
In the
final section of the book, the author describes the uses and
appropriateness of
mini-lessons. She notes that all the
practice in the world does not promote adequate understanding if
students are
not trained in the concepts they need to know in order to make their
writings
proficient. She offers two ways to
present a mini-lesson: to the class, or to the student.
When a teacher notices the majority of a class
having the same or a very similar problem, a mini-lesson for the entire
class
should be used. When only a student or a
handful of them have a problem, the mini-lesson should be restricted to
just
those students, as there is nothing to gain from teaching students in
things
they are already aware of and are applying consistently and adequately. She notes also that a key element of a
mini-lesson is “that students are not given follow-up exercises to
practice
what has been taught. The teacher simply
helps them use the information if their writing suggests a need for the
skill
and they seem ready for it” (151).
Exercises take up time that can be spent writing, and in order
for
students to become better writers, they need the time spent on writing
optimized.
In all the
author presents a noteworthy book that, unlike most books, actually
presents
solutions to problems; however, there are some issues in the book that
I am not
convinced are ideal ways to teach. For
example, one suggestion the author has concerning corrections on final
drafts
is to purposely overlook errors. It is
understandable that students spend a great deal of time working a piece
of
writing from first draft to final draft, but that still does not excuse
the
fundamental role of the teacher: to instruct.
The author writes, “Many teachers follow a hands-off policy for
at least
some final drafts, especially if the writing is not being sent to an
unknown
audience” (97). Regardless of who does
or does not read the piece, errors are still errors, and the failure to
notify
a student of such errors is a failure in teaching.
The above
is the only criticism I can find for the book, but, it is important to
note,
the author presents alternatives even to the criticism.
For example, directly after her idea to
neglect errors, the author suggests, alternatively to that, to put a
check mark
in the margin where the error is and have the student locate and repair
the
error. She notes, however, that caution
should be used here because using a checkmark in such a fashion will
only work
if the student already understands the kind of error in question. Of course, the in-depth sections on
mini-lessons give ample suggestions on how to correct this as well.
Overall,
the book is worth consideration for a reference. Weaver
puts in the work years of
experience. Even with the only criticism
I did find with the book, there are, directly next to it, alternatives
to the
method that are sensible.
Sarah Slaughter
O’Day, Kim.
(1994). Using Formal and Informal Writing
in Middle School Social Studies. Retrieved February 22,
2007 from http:// members.ncss.org/se/5801/580113. html.
Using Formal and Informal Writing in Middle School Social
Studies
Summary:
This article
was published in a journal put out by the National Council for the
Social
Studies which is one of the country’s leading professional associations
for
social studies teachers. It discusses
the value of writing in Social Studies and History curriculum classes. The article organizes the value of writing in
the following way.
·
Using writing to encourage thinking
o
Writing
encourages students to think more and process information more fully. She calls pre-writing “pre-thinking” in her
class and says that this contributes less dominant students to
participate more
in discussions because they have thought out what they are going to say
ahead
of time.
·
Writing encourages independent
learning
o
If
a student writes down what they already know than they are more likely
to bride
the less familiar information with more familiar information. Also, through their own writing, students
begin to find more evidence of author bias in what they read. In this way writing helps students to become
more critical thinkers of social studies.
·
Raising teachers’ comfort level
o
O’day
says that in many subject areas, teachers are apprehensive about
including
writing into their curriculum. Social
studies teachers tend to see themselves as the transmitters of
information and
are at first uncomfortable with students writing informally in their
classes. Because of the fears, students
and teachers alike will need to practice this in order to develop
comfort.
O’Day says that both formal and informal writing
is a
learning tool in Social studies classrooms and it improves student
thinking and
performance.
Response:
I thought
this article was great. O’Day did a
wonderful job at making the case for more writing in Social Studies
classes. I agree that writing does
create more critical thinkers. Also,
writing helps us to express ourselves.
In a Social Studies class writing can help students express what
they
know and why what they are learning is valid or not valid.
I especially love the idea of pre-writing as
pre-thinking. Giving students a chance
to brainstorm and plan for class discussions takes the fear and
intimidation
out of that aspect of class and encourages more participants. It also allows for a maximum amount of
students to feel confident and knowledgeable.
The article
could have been a little longer with more examples of how different
writing
strategies were successful in her classroom.
She had wonderful theories, but more evidence would have been
appreciated.
Sarah Slaughter
Langer, Judith
A. (2002) Effective Literacy Instruction: Building
Successful Reading
and Writing Programs. New
York:
National Council of Teachers of English.
This book, written by Judith Langer is basically a
collection of the findings of a research project called the “Excellence
in
English Project” which is a five year study directed by Langer for the
National
Research Center on English Learning and Achievement.
Langer defines effective teachers of English
as being teachers who work within the realities of modern-day middle
school and
high school English classrooms, most in poor, urban areas with minority
students and create students who are engaged in literature, practiced
in
writing and comfortable with intelligent literary discourse. Six general findings came out of the study:
1.
In effective
schools, learning and instruction related to knowledge and conventions
of
English and high literacy take place as separated, simulated, and
integrated
experiences. In contrast, in typical schools, although each approach
might be
used at some time, one or another instructional approach dominates.
2.
In effective
schools, test preparation does not mean mere practice of test-related
items. Rather, the focus is on the
underlying knowledge and skills needed to do well in coursework and in
life, as
well as on the tests, and these become part of the ongoing English
language
arts learning goals and the students’ ongoing received curriculum. In contrast, in the typical schools, test prep
means test practice. It is allocated its own space in class time, often
before
testing begins, apart from the rest of the years’ work and goals.
3.
In effective
schools, overt connections are constantly made between knowledge,
skills, and
ideas across lessons, classes, and grades as well as across in-school
and
out-of-school applications. In contrast,
in the typical schools, connections are more often unspoken or
implicit, if
they are made at all. More often, the
lessons, units, and curricula are treated as disconnected entities.
4.
In effective
schools, students in English language arts classes are overtly taught
strategies for thinking as well as doing.
In contrast, in typical schools, the focus is on the content or
skill,
without overtly teaching the overarching strategies for planning,
organizing,
completing, or reflecting on the content or activity.
5.
In effective
schools, the tenor of the instructional environment is such that, even
after
students reach achievement goals, English language arts teachers move
students
beyond them towards deeper understandings of and ability to generate
ideas and
knowledge. In contrast, in the typical
schools, once students exhibit use of the immediate understandings or
skills
and focus, teachers move on to another lesson.
6.
In effective
schools, English learning and high literacy (the content as well as the
skills)
are treated as social activity, with depth and complexity of
understanding and
proficiency with conventions growing from students’ interaction with
present
and imagined others. In contrast, in
typical schools, students tend to work alone or interact with the
teacher, and
when collaborative or group work occurs, the activity focuses on
answering
questions rather than engaging in substantive discussion from multiple
perspectives.
Although, all
the schools in
the study were different, they all shared one common thing. Each nurtured a climate that coordinates
efforts to improve student improvement, fosters teacher participation
in a
variety of professional activities, and creates instructional
improvement
activities in ways that offer teachers a strong sense of agency, values
commitment to the profession of teaching, engenders caring towards
students and
colleagues, and fosters respect for learning as a normal part of life. The book in separate chapters highlights two
schools with effective teachers in urban school districts, highlights
an
effective teacher of English language learning, and highlights an
effective
teacher in a suburban school with rich professional support. Each of these sections is broken down into a
discussion of the school profile, the teacher profile, classroom
settings,
program organization and professional support.
The book ends with a summary of how to create educational
culture within
which students learn and contains an Appendix section with more
detailed
information regarding the schools specifically and specific class
activities.
This
book reads very much like a scientific study and in that regard is very
dense. However, it is full of thorough
information about successful English programs and how to implement them. I appreciated the descriptions of shared
positive attributes among teachers and schools and specific information
about
English programs that work and are successful.
As a pre-service teacher, the professional profiles of
‘effective”
teachers were enlightening and can serve as a basis for my own
professional
development. I believe this study to be
fairly well-conducted, and extremely well-reported.
Due to the abundance of information provided,
there is much to be learned, and the study is completely capable of
being
understood and analyzed by the general reader.
Mindy Smith
Hillocks Jr., George. The Focus on Form
vs. Content in Teaching
Writing. Research in the Teaching of
English. Volume 40: Number 2, Urbana:
Illinois, 2005.
In
the past teachers of writing have only focused on the form of writing. They believe that once they know the forms of
writing: the parts of a paragraph, the
parts of an essay, the structure of a sentence, and the element of
style then
the students, should be able to write a paper flawlessly.
They also believe in very little instruction
over content. However this essay says
that if the students decide to write about and pay less attention to
the form
that they will be writing in. It
also
claims that even if they decide what to write about and do some
research on the
topic, knowing forms and formatting will not help the students pull out
the
content of the paper from the research they have.
The
only real teaching that the author says occurs is direct example of
good
papers, and editing of their papers by the teachers, among which errors
are
usually fixed incorrectly. The
only way that the teachers are preparing
the students for writing assignments and other kinds of writings at the
primary
and secondary levels is through writing assignments.
The assignment is that the student should
write a multi-paragraph composition called a five-paragraph theme (5P). This would be a highly structured five
paragraph essay. However many times the only strategy taught for
generating
ideas and specific content of the papers was prewriting or maybe
brainstorming.
The
author also claims that if teachers were to teach about content we
would have
better writing. However in order for
this to happen one of three things must occur.
They are as follows: 1)
universities should teach new teachers a different way of teaching
writing; 2)
change the way teachers that are already teaching teach; or 3) changing
the
format of state tests to include data for the students to write about. Then the teachers would adapt and begin to
teach content “to the test”.
I
personally think that if teachers taught more about the importance of
the
content then it could improve student writing.
However I also believe that teaching form is also important. I believe in this man’s research and I agree
with him on the content teaching.
However
I would also have to add that the students need the forms to be able to
put
what they want to say down on paper properly.
I also believe that a teacher could effectively teach both, and
I
believe that, that is what Dr. LeNoir is trying to teach us this
through
“Inside Out”. Not only will this help us
by bringing about this change in ideas of writing but it will also help
our
schools and our students to do better on these newer forms of
standardized
testing, for example the new composition portion of the SAT.
I really enjoyed reading this article and I would
recommend anyone who wants to look at it to contact me and I’ll make
them a
copy. It was interesting because of what
he found out through his research. However, if you are only slightly
interested
I suggest you stick with our texts in class because he had little to
add, it
was however interesting to see his research.
Melissa Tallent
Harris,
Karen R., Steve Graham, and Linda H. Mason, eds. “Improving the
Writing, Knowledge, and Motivation of Struggling
Young Writers: Effects of Self-Regulated Strategy Development With and
Without Peer
Support.” American Education Research
Journal 43:2 (Summer 2006):
295-338. ProQuest. Western Kentucky University Library, 17 February 2007 <
http://proquest.umi.com.libsrv.wku.edu/pqdlink?>.
Summary:
The article,
“Improving the
Writing, Knowledge, and Motivation of Struggling Young Writers: Effects
of
Self-Regulated Strategy Development With and Without Peer Support,”
examines
the effectiveness of an instructional model (SRSD) designed to foster
development in each of the following areas: strategic behavior,
knowledge, and
motivation. The addition of a peer
support component augmented SRSD instruction by increasing student’s
knowledge
of planning and enhancing generalization in two writing genres: the
short story
and the persuasive essay. With and
without peer assistance, the article concluded that students wrote
longer, more
complete, and qualitatively than those in comparison conditions
(Writer’s
Workshop).
The SRSD
method is a simple three step strategy - topic selection, organization
of the
writing plan, and individual development of the plan (which includes
development of vocabulary) and leads to changes and improvements in
four main
aspects of students' performance: quality of writing, knowledge of
writing,
approach to writing, and self-efficacy.
Additionally, data obtained during the study found that the SRSD
method
promoted student independence, improved writing skill knowledge, and
increased
motivation and effort, not only for second-graders but also for middle
and high
school students. Most importantly, for teachers working in schools
where
high-stake testing governs teaching methodology, the article provides
conclusive validation for multiple positive “educational implications”
(22)
associated with explicit and systematical SRSD teaching strategies.
Review:
Although
the article focused on young writers,
interesting findings, which could easily be transferred to a high
school
learning environment, were found: (1) teachers should engage students
as active
collaborators in their own learning reinforcing ownership; (2) learning
can be
improved through self-regulatory skills; and (3) modeling, dialogue,
sharing
and scaffolding are critical. The
study, adequately confirmed through specific instructional procedures
and
relevant findings, that the SRSD method was an effective means of
improving
student writing. Overall, the article
was well organized, reader friendly, and provided effective classroom
practices
in writing instruction supported by valid and realistic data.
Melissa
Tallent
Many
books about teaching writing now exist to guide
secondary teachers; yet most of them assume that students enter the
classroom
with a certain motivation and level of writing ability, an assumption
which I
associate with Nancie Atwell. Due to my preconceived formulation about
Atwell, I have been very condescending
this semester in regards to the reading selections from In The
Middle –
a middle school teaching ‘bible’ of sorts.
Although I felt my opinion was justified based upon
implementation and
ideology of the reading selections, I began to question the validity
and decided
to devil deeper into another Atwell reading in hopes that I, too, could
find
the Atwell charm.
At first glance, Lessons That Change Writers appeared
to be simplistic and again idealistic but the promise of practical
curricular
resources encouraged me to continue. The
book and companion binder, a plus for easy access and photocopying, is
arranged
in four sections:
1.
Lessons about Topic- minilessons
designed to
aide students in finding a focused and profound starting point.
2.
Lessons about Principles-
minilessons designed
to teach students the ‘so what’ of writing and ‘really bad words’.
3.
Lessons
about
Genres - a series of minilessons on fiction, poetry, and essay
writing.
4.
Lessons about Conventions -
minilessons which
attempts to provide students with the knowledge and editing skills to
perfect
their writing both orally and visually.
Additionally, there is ‘how to arrange your
minilessons’
section, which might be advantageous for a beginning teacher but not
for a
veteran teacher because most already have a standing syllabus. Each
section
followed a simple format – list of materials, discussion and purpose of
lesson,
actual lesson, and follow-up lessons and assignments with the primary
focus of
each on the ‘famed’ minilesson - a vehicle for helping students improve
their
writing.
Embedded within the minilessons Atwell includes writings
that she describes as ‘the best of the best’.
Even thought I am not fan of minilessons, I did discover through
careful
review that with some tweaking the ideas would be appropriate for all
ages but
the ‘best of the best’ writing were not, in my opinion, the best and I
would
not use them as examples in a high school classroom.
In the midst of Lessons That Change
Writers,I found the golden needle in the haystack – a list of
rules,
prompts, questions, and numerous Barlett’s quotes (about writers and
writing)
all of which were veritable and ready to be copied and posted in the
classroom.
In conclusion, was my condensation of Atwell justified? No
because of the hype surrounding Atwell, I was expecting an end-all
fix-all
bible and failed to look anything useful. Essentially, Atwell simply
reiterates
what all other authors are screaming which is real writers need to
brainstorm,
pre-write, and choose topics that deeply interest them; the key for all
teachers is to find the approach that works best for their classroom. Overall, I believe the book would be an asset
for those who plan on teaching middle school but for the high school
classroom,
the following are better writing resources: Writing with a Purpose
by
Joseph F. Trimmer; Six-Way Paragraphs in the Content Areas
based on the
work of Walter Pauk; and Writing Step by Step 10th
Edition by
Randy DeVillez. Even though Atwell
failed to ‘win me over’, I am thankful I reviewed this book and I am
thankful
that Atwell ‘threw’ in the golden needles – I used one today. When my juniors orated the popular copout, “I
don’t have anything to write about, I responded with the word of Willa
Cather
“Most of the basic material a writer works with is acquired before the
age of
fifteen.” They were, for a moment,
speechless and for that, I say thank you Nancie Atwell.
Julie
Walters
Zinsser, William “Inventing The Truth The Art and Craft
of Memoir”. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1995.
I chose
this book on writing memoirs because writing memoirs
is an area where I have not had much experience. The
author, William Zinsser focused on the
writings of eight authors, who are known for their memoir writing
styles and
techniques. The authors that are
reflected on in this book are Russell Baker, Jill Ker Conway, Annie
Dillard,
Ian Frazier, Henry Louis Gates, Jr. Alfred Kazin, Toni Morrison and
Eileen
Simpson. This book focuses on
writing
memoirs as a way to tell the stories of ones life and the people and
events
that make it important.
One of the
important facts that I got out of this book is
that it is important for the author to be aware of the important things
in his
or her own. Knowing what is important
helps the writer understand what should be included into a memoir and
what can
be left out. Another important thing
that I got out of this book is that a memoir can and will have some
fiction in
it. This can not be helped because a
memoir is written about the past, and are written from remembered
truths and
not necessarily what actually happened.
Even though I felt that there
was many important tools discussed in the book to use when writing a
memoir
there are just a couple authors that really seemed worthwhile in
mentioning.
Russell
Baker focused his memoir on growing up during the depression. He did an outstanding job showing how
this
time period affected both himself and the society in which he was a
part
of. When asked how much of his memoir
was truthful and how much is good writing, he stated “Well, all the
incidents
are truthful.” What he meant by this is
that there has to be some connection to fiction to be able to tell a
story from
memory.
Toni
Morrison seemed to focus on intertwining memoirs with fiction and
finding the
place in the middle where these two come together.
Ms. Morrison, has been a great voice to the
African American Slaves, she has a great way of telling their story as
though
she lived it with them. Ms. Morrison
is
able to creatively tell her stories and shows the reader how to do so
through
memoirs.
The
best lesson I got out of this book was when William Zinsser wrote, “Be
true to
yourself and to the culture that you were born into.
Have the courage to tell your story as only
you can tell it” (page 20). I thought
this book was a good guide when writing a memoir; it seemed to give
good tips
on becoming a strong writer. However, I
thought some of the writers featured were not very interesting and that
they
made the book longer and more drawn out than necessary.
I feel that reading this book, did show me
some different things to look for when writing a memoir and I would
recommend
parts of it to other writers, however, I do not feel that it is
necessary to
read and study the book in its entirety.
By just studying a few of the contributors, one is able to
understand
what the others are trying to convey.