Post 2 of 2 for 3.15.2022 Invention&revision

TORDA'S SPRING 2023 TEACHING SITE

Post 2 of 2 for 3.15.2022 Invention&revision

3/8/2022

OVERVIEW: Part of what Writing Studies Pedagogy is always interested in, regardless of what angle they come at it from, is helping students to develop strong habits as writers. This is very difficult. The classroom discourages authentic engagement in this work. The job of the classroom is to prepare students to be able to write without a teacher forcing them to do it (Peter Elbow wrote a whole book called, in fact Writing Without Teachers) in a space where they are forced to write by teachers.

Thus, invention and revision, two parts of the writing process that should be self-directed, are frequently only ever teacher-focused and teacher-driven. But, the idea is, if we as teachers of writing craft invention and revision in ways that students see as valuable, they will, with some effort and a lot of time-on-task, transfer these skills to other classes, other occasions for writing beyond the classroom. This is the idea behind threshold concepts. I think that, certainly, we can all recall the moment when we realized that, like it or not, good writing happens in revision in particular.

WHAT TO POST: The readings this week consider the history and practice of both invention and revision in Composition Pedagogy. In your reading response, you may elect to focus on one or the other or both. Consider how one or both of these skills are taught such that students of writing actually move past that threshold and adopt skills that make them stronger writers--you are welcome to talk about the possibilities and impossibilities that are suggested by the readings.

10 Comments

Sarah Bond

3/12/2022 05:57:55 am

The readings make it quite clear that while many writers exercise various approaches to invention and revision, no serious writer considers them book-ends to the writing process. Unfortunately, however, many students do. Often, my students consider themselves stuck if they look at a question and cannot immediately start writing, and they consider it a personal failure if feedback suggests that they change their approach. While I unapologetically blame this on the random prompts of standardized tests as well as its arbitrary grading process, I also realize that 8th Grade ELA provides opportunities for students to rethink both invention and revision as part of the recursive process of writing. Forgive my somewhat scripted approach to the discussion board, but I plan to fall back on the 4-paragraph heuristic I acquired in middle school and still teach today.
To begin, a real tension exists between generating valuable invention strategies and creating chaos in the minds of young writers. Common strategies mentioned in the text include journaling, class discussions, and clustering. All are useful for formulating ideas, but any can throw a student off-track. I have one student in particular, Sonny, who wants every idea he encounters to show up in his essay. This is largely part of what it means to be a middle-schooler – too many ideas with too little structure, but according to Chris Anson, “habituated practice” of such strategies can lead to “entrenchment” (77), which then leads novice writers to miscommunication. Even those who excel in their discipline can misapply invention strategies and end up with haphazard essays on topics they actually know quite well. Lauer’s guidelines for ensuring the effectiveness of heuristic procedures are helpful: transcendency, flexibility, and generative capacity (54). As a teacher, these support the “fixed/growth mindset” that we make much of in the classroom. More importantly, these strategies become antidotes to “writer’s block” (which is often code for: I just don’t know where or how to start…).
Once students finally make progress on their essays, the idea of revision feels like defeat. Interestingly, this might be tied to the abundance of time we spend on invention. Sommers writes that many students are not unwilling but rather unsure when it comes to revision, but I would suggest they’re also tired of thinking and writing about it. Whereas experienced writers “adopt a holistic perspective and see revision as a recursive process” (330), novice writers who have brainstormed, organized, and recorded their ideas see revision as “punishment work” (Clark 82). With this in mind, I have started to incorporate time before submission to guide students through a self-editing process. We move through a posted checklist together, identifying errors, both intrinsic and extrinsic, and making adjustments. Students can, during that time, conference with peers or with me. When I asked students to reflect, they did not consider this final step revision, even though they all benefited from the process. According to Sommers, many writers have a revision process that goes by another name (325); as long as this step is part of a students’ mindset, the terminology is unimportant.
In short, I have spent most of my life in the classroom, as either teacher or student, and writer’s block and writer’s anxiety are often named as the culprits of failed essay attempts. If taught correctly, invention strategies and a revision mindset are the cure. While I appreciate the frustration professors feel regarding the 4- or 5-paragraph essays and overused transitions, I also live in the reality that students (like myself) need tools, or heuristics, like these that are reliable when the prompt feels unapproachable.

Maura Geoghegan

3/14/2022 03:07:40 pm

It was interesting to learn about the history of the value and implementation of invention and revision in not only the field of composition and rhetoric, but also in the teaching of writing. The ways in which invention and revision are presented to students in schools greatly influences their ways in approaching these stages of writing since “school writing assignments often don’t give students an opportunity to write for real audiences or purposes” and teachers are able to reinforce their views on invention or revision (Bamberg 84).

I found the strategies offered to help students with invention easier to implement than the strategies offered to help students with revision. I agreed with many points made by Clark, such as the fact that “all assignments should be scaffolded” and to “assure [students] that everyone finds invention difficult” and help demystify the process for them by helping “them understand that discovery of a main topic or subtopic can occur at any stage of the writing process, not only at the beginning” (58). Most students are likely familiar with freewriting and brainstorming, but I think the class and group discussion strategy and the clustering strategy would be helpful for students and would be easy enough to incorporate into class without much prep.

Revision seems to be the more complex of the two to tackle since students have much narrower views on what revision is or what it should look like after their many years in school. Students “typically viewed revision as error correction and made only superficial changes in their texts,” which shows that more work needs to be done to get students to focus on their writing and ideas as a whole instead of giving too much focus to sentence-level errors (Bamberg 82). However, it can take a lot of work and effort in order to get students to make these meaning-based changes, so this can be difficult to shift to without enough time to prep. The strategies and ideas offered can also be time-consuming, and not every teacher may have the luxury of setting aside time for writing workshops or conferences if they have a strict curriculum they’re expected to follow. I’m fortunate enough to have a lot of freedom and autonomy at my school, so I have been able to use one-on-one writing conferences with my freshman and sophomore classes and some of my colleagues have as well. Implementing peer response groups or student-led writing workshops is a strategy I’d be interested in using, but seems like it can be challenging and take a lot of work to implement and have it work effectively. My initial thoughts on implementing these with my own classes are that my 9 Honors students would be more willing to try this strategy since they tend to enjoy reading and writing more, whereas my 10A students would be extremely resistant to sharing their writing with anyone besides the teacher or possibly a trusted friend since they tend to dislike reading and writing and have more anxiety around the act of writing especially. However, this strategy does seem like it would be very beneficial if clearly introduced and modeled.

Olivia Limoncelli

3/14/2022 03:38:56 pm

The history of writing and composition is interesting in connection to “invention” and teaching writing. Writers have been writing for so long now it makes me wonder how work is still original. As Clark questions, “Are ideas “created” through the active mind, and generated new and fresh from within?” (p. 48). Or are the ideas out there, waiting to be “discovered”? Writing uses ethos, pathos, and logos to give it our own style. Thinking of the emphasis on community (p 53), teaching writing to students should be collaborative. It is interesting to me that writing that was too personal and based on personal experience was then considered “self-centered” and “unconvincing”. I feel as though today, I give my students a lot of opportunities to write about themselves because it interests them and helps others connect to them too. However, as Clarke mentions, there is a strong emphasis on argumentative writing today (Clarke, p 53). One teaching method that I like and I incorporate in my classroom is teaching personal writing during the “early” phases of the writing process. I use free-writing as Clarke also mentions, which helps students to find a “voice” in writing (p 54). Another method which helps students is pre-writing.
Clarke mentions “Writer’s Block” accompanied by contributing factors. If we can teach out students to avoid these, then we can definitely help them to improve their writing. Some of these factors include: assumptions about writing are misleading, they edit too early in the composing process, they lack appropriate planning strategies or rely on inappropriate strategies, they evaluate their writing with inappropriate criteria or criteria that is misunderstood (p 57). To ensure this doesn’t happen we must make sure students understand the assignment. Another method Clarke mentions is scaffolding each assignment. Not only to familiarize students with the topic, but to also prevent students from trying to complete the assignments the night before. One way I could do this is to assign different pieces of an essay. For example, one night is pre-writing, then they write their thesis, then the introduction, and so on. A part of this is that students will become better writers when they practice writing which is something Dr. Torda also brought up in one of our classes. At least if they are writing, they are practicing the skill. Some of the other helpful invention strategies include clustering (a visual way of brainstorming), journaling (to reflect on their writing), and class and group discussions (which can also be held using an online platform).
To touch briefly on the revision process, I want to bring up a few strategies that Nancy Sommers proposes. Reconstructing writing instead of changing a few words is beneficial. One way of doing this is to find your argument and then to find words/language that strongly supports it. In rewriting, the most effective words are selected to strengthen the argument/paper. Experienced writers seek to “create or discover meaning in the engagement of their writing through revision” (Sommers, p 330). If we can get our students to really engage in their own writing and especially during the revision process, then we can help them grow as writers. I think the journals which Clarke mentioned would help a lot here. Students can reflect on their writing, their processes, and their revisions.

Brian Seibert

3/15/2022 07:50:39 am

Invention and revision strategies have been tied together closely in the writing process as far back as ancient civilizations. Although invention originated in rhetoric and discourse, the concepts have evolved over time to include the writing aspect of revision. Aristotle is associated with claims that, “Rhetoric is an art that can be taught (thus, students can be “taught” to invent), and that subject matter can be discovered in the world” (Clark, 51). The concept of being able to teach students to invent is an important one. Educators have influence in that aspect and can provide strategies for students to help create ideas.

In chapter 2, “Invention,” Clark highlights some helpful strategies to help students invent. Some of these strategies I have used in the classroom and others present brand new opportunities for me to use. As I reflect on my own practices of pre-writing / brainstorming, I realize that I typically do not give students enough time to invent. The extent of the brainstorming usually consists of filling out a graphic organizer. It is moderately effective but can be improved. Clark builds on the ideas of Aristotle when she suggests having students discuss their thoughts aloud with their peers. Conversing with others is a great way to get ideas flowing. Then, they at least have a starting point on which they can build. All too often I notice students staring at the prompt, making no progress toward their goal. When I ask them about it, they may respond by saying, “I don’t know what to write,” or, “I was never in a situation the prompt is asking me about.” By allowing them some time to verbally discuss with their peers would be a good way to at least find their beginning. Another strategy that Clark details is journaling. I have used journaling in the past for creative writing purposes. While I believe that is helpful in its own right, Clark clarifies that journaling is not a diary, it is more a place for developing ideas or thoughts on readings. This is a good strategy for certain types of writing. For instance, if the performance task at the end of a unit is to write an argument or expository essay that relies on evidence from readings, students could keep track of their thoughts toward the prompt as they examine each text.

Revision also has an important role in composition. The process has evolved over the years and is more focused on adjusting the whole rather than error correction. Clark mentions a study conducted by Jane Emig where a student referred to revision as correcting errors and describing the process as “punishment work” (82). While studies show that good writers tend to revise more than novice writers, this process is often overlooked in school. With jam-packed curricula where teachers are expected to stay on pace for the school year, there is little time left for revision. Clark details a number of strategies to aid the revision process. In the ideal classroom, in the ideal school, these strategies would be great. However, strategies like peer reviews can be very powerful, but students need to know what they are focusing on. They need to be taught how to help their peers. Unfortunately, there is very little time to incorporate such strategies in classrooms that follow a strict curriculum. My school is adopting a new curriculum for the English department next year. I believe these strategies to help students invent and revise are incredibly important to their writing. Some of the concepts Clark has detailed are ones that I plan to share with my colleagues and administrators when it comes to finding an effective curriculum.

Shauna Cascarella

3/15/2022 09:40:36 am

Dylan Dryer discusses the threshold concept that “writing is (also always) a cognitive activity” and brings up some intriguing points for discussion of composition theories. They describe writing as a full body and nervous system activity and embodied cognition of writing recognizes and acknowledges the “physical and affective aspects of the composing process” (Dryer 75). This isn’t something that I think about very often, and how truly exhausting writing long form can be quite simply because of this. I found it particularly interesting and wish that there was more illumination on the topic.

Dryer also explains the importance of metacognition in the writing process and this is something that I have used in my classrooms since I first gained control. I learn best through Metacognitive teaching — knowing how my teachers learn and work through a process so that I may mirror that process or understand where the thought process comes from. Whether it’s reading, writing, or revising I always run through my Metacognitive process with my students before I expect them to give it a try. However, I do find that students become more rigid in their thinking when being taught through this process because they are more likely to assume that my thinking (my Metacognitive process) is the only right way of thinking, and no matter how much I try to eliminate this line of thinking it may still persist for some. Asking students to then reflect throughout their entire writing process from start to finish is also an incredibly practical pedagogical practice that I have begun implementing in my daily classroom routines. Going beyond asking how they feel about writing (which I still do) I also ask them how effective they think their writing is or was: did you get the point across effectively? How well argued is your writing? What is one thing you could do to improve this piece of writing?

The other process that Dryer focuses on is that students need to practice regularly, and this is a concept I believe we all know and understand to be completely true. However, they emphasize that practice must be varied to avoid entrenchment and habituation in student writing ability. The repetitive nature of writing practice leads students to write without thinking consciously about what they are writing. Not only is this a frightening concept for building diverse thinkers, but it’s tragic to think that we can over-practice our writing students into little writing robots who don’t think for themselves. So many of our previous readings have emphasized the need for personal writing, and I find that by the time students come to me in eleventh and twelfth grade they are no longer able to think about writing as personal (or even as creative) because they are so habituated by the process of the five-paragraph essay or the various grammatical rules (which largely no longer apply anyway). I try to break this routine down slowly by getting them to first question what the difficulty is in writing personally/creatively and then ask them to practice in smaller assignments. Teaching college essay writing is probably the most challenging assignment for many of them because of these many stressors.

Matthew Cutter

3/15/2022 09:50:34 am

In the article by Nancy Sommers, we see the results of a case study that she did on student writers and then her own interpretation of those results. One of her focuses was on the standard linear model of writing assessment, and how this model can often handicap writers and be a detriment to effective revision practices. Breaking free of this linear model of writing instruction seems to be able to open more doors for students to write and revise in a more rewarding and natural way.
Invention is the start of a writing assignment, when the writer begins to formulate ideas. In a linear model this often starts at formulating a thesis and then writing an introduction around that thesis. Sommers argues that this can start to lead to a serious problem. Sommers explains:
The only modifications of ideas in the students’ essays occurred when they tried out two or three introductory paragraphs. This results, in part, because the students have been taught in another version of the linear model of composing to use a thesis statement as a controlling device in their introductory paragraphs. (Sommers 327).
Beginning writing instruction with a thesis statement, often leads to writing an introduction, and then rewriting that introduction until it is perfect. Once that introduction has been written, student writers will often write body paragraphs that conform to the parameters of that introduction, but they will never look at the body paragraphs with the care that they crafted that fist introduction.
As a teacher, I am guilty of beginning writing assessments with the task of crafting a thesis statement. I think that a thesis statement is something that can act as an important guide in the early stages of the writing process. What I do think I’ll start doing is have the students work on their body paragraphs first so they can see their thesis in action. I believe that this shake up of the linear model of writing assessment could help. This way students can change their thesis as their ideas change. Then when they write the intro and conclusion, both those paragraphs will be much stronger.

Ashley Merola

3/15/2022 09:56:39 am

The readings that resonated with me the most this week revolve around revision as a recursive, rather than linear, process. Both Nancy Sommers and Betty Bamberg attempt to remedy the lack of research surrounding revision strategies in the contemporary composition classroom through their respective texts. While Bamberg offers a comprehensive overview of revision trends over time, Sommers summarizes a more specific series of studies she conducted to compare the perspectives of student writers to those of experienced writers toward revision practices. I would argue that their approaches, although accurate in theory, prove difficult to implement in the secondary composition classroom due to how deeply deficit thinking tends to run in the minds of students (and teachers to an extent). To reach a reality in which students strengthen their revision skills and, in turn, master life-long literacy, we must work to deconstruct the detrimental attitudes often associated with revision in the K-12 setting.

The results of Sommers’s studies speak to this phenomenon. In regard to the revision strategies of student writers, she found they “decide to stop revising when they decide that they have not violated any of the rules for revising” (Sommers 328). It is important to note that these young writers should not be faulted for this type of response; as Sommers states, “it is not that students are unwilling to revise, but rather that they do what they have been taught to do in a consistently narrow and predictable way” (327). I often see this behavior at the beginning of the year in my own classroom. When my students write their first essay for me, I try to make my feedback on their rough drafts as direct as possible to identify one or two areas in which they could aim to improve throughout the year. For example, I may add a comment that says, “Remember to refer back to your thesis at the end of each body paragraph! You should try to revise your concluding sentences to fix this problem in your other paragraphs as well.” The suggesting mode in Google Docs allows me to make similar suggestions that students can then accept or reject. However, a handful of those who have grown up with this technology tend to fix the sentence I highlighted and then resolve my comment without revising the rest of their work. It is almost as if they feel they have completed the revision process when there are no remaining comments on the page. This pattern demonstrates how students have been conditioned to comprehend teacher-directed strategies as the be-all and end-all of the revision process - a belief that works against the goal of life-long literacy.

Thankfully, Bamberg’s chapter outlines many successful student-directed revision strategies that can help teachers deconstruct this attitude toward revision. Peer response groups in particular present a promising alternative. Bamberg describes how the forms students fill out with a partner “must be carefully designed and linked to prior classroom instruction” in order to “help students focus on the relevant rhetorical issues” (94). My Creative Writing students complete a similar peer feedback form before turning in the final draft of any assignment, and they have told me how beneficial they find the activity. Without a teacher intervening, it is possible, and even enjoyable, for students to strengthen their revision skills, whether they work with others or on their own.

Melissa Batty

3/15/2022 01:40:21 pm

Aah, revision, it induces fear and trepidation. I must not have written a “good” paper if it calls for a revision. Nancy Sommers’ article argues that this line of thinking stems from institutional educational standards that deem writing is 1), linear, and 2), lexical –– meaning student writers focus on format and vocabulary over content and persuasion. Revision becomes an unnecessary tool for students if teachers don’t bleed all over their papers with red ink; job well done, student –– perfect sentence structure, intact grammar, varying vocabulary, writing product is complete. In essence, students learn to fear systemic failures of writing instead of fearing individual failures of writing: inept thesis, arguments with no support, a dissonance between writer and audience. Sommers argues this stems from the theory that speech is the first and final frontier; one only needs to conceive of their argument, think through their argument, and then produce their argument –– linear, A to B to C. Therefore, there is no room for revision; however, Barthes asserts that it is the work of revision, the possibility that there is room for change in one’s argument, that separates speech from writing (324). That means revision is an essential skill that student writers must learn to use when creating texts.

Sommers’ explanation that writers view themselves as a participant in their writing is key in helping students understand their authorship and what it means to produce writing for an audience which waits to engage with their written word. The importance of symbolism then becomes what the text is saying in opposition to the words students are using as signifiers. The focus is on the semantics of the writing over the linear and lexical components of the writing–– context over content. As an undergraduate, many of my educators did place an emphasis on revision as a tool for precision; the focus was not on what I was arguing, but how my argument was written: thesis, supporting paragraph, proper citations, etc. The problem is that did not open my mind up to the possibility that my text did not make sense –– maybe my argument was lacking the nuance of contextual support, or maybe my argument was not present –– either way, I was revising for the red pen, not for my growth as a writer.

Sommers’ research presents that writers with experience understand that revision is not linear; as Barthes poetically asserts, writing “develops like a seed, not a line” (329). Writing needs revision because it is a process of growth. It includes additions, deletions, it is recursive, the sum of all parts equal the whole. Writing, Sommers states, is holistic. Equal parts beginning, middle, end, and then start again to make sure that the text is an instrument of one’s authorship –– is the writer both an agent of the text (controlling their narrative argument) and is the writer showing concern for their audience (presenting their argument with coherence and fluidity.) Students need to understand that ideas are like seeds, they need watering; metaphors aside, writing needs revision.

Kayleigh Holt

3/15/2022 02:13:29 pm

In my own classroom, the part of the writing process that I often find the most difficult to help students make connections to is invention. I feel like a lot of that difficulty stems from two places. The first is that the instruction that students have received regarding invention prior to them entering my classroom is often extremely varied. Students either have a variety of techniques that they know, but they are unsure when to use them, or more troublingly the students have no learned strategies that will enable them to approach the invention process confidently. The second issue is that often the prewriting or invention strategies that are built into our curriculum are rigid and don’t offer students the flexibility to approach the invention process in a different way if the given strategy does not help them.

After reading Irene L. Clark’s chapter regarding “Invention” something that became apparent is that invention should be spoken about with the students plainly. Classes should discuss what helps and works for them when they are generating ideas for a writing piece, and they should also discuss the fact that it is natural to feel stuck with your writing at times. As invention strategies are introduced and explored in the classroom, students should be working to determine which strategies work best for them personally, as well as which strategies fit with the different writing topics. This transparency will help to demystify the process of invention for the students and help them to feel more agency in their own writing. I saw some overlap between the vision Clark had of the composition classroom and Inoue’s anti-racist classroom, particularly in the emphasis on student understanding. Clark spoke about how helping students to understand the assignment is paramount to them being successful during the invention process. I see Inoue as taking that idea to its next step as the assignment itself is discussed and created through a combination of student and teacher input. Furthermore, Clark mentions the importance of creating a safe and welcoming “classroom atmosphere that invites experimentation and exploration so that students will be able to entertain possibilities without fear of ridicule or negative evaluation” (p. 58). This atmosphere is something that Inoue is concerned with fostering within the classroom as well through the exploration of the seven ecological elements that constitute an anti-racist classroom.

I found the invention strategies that Clark wrote about to be helpful, as most of them were broad enough that I can see myself incorporating them into the next prewriting session I have in my classroom. In particular, I found the topic of “Exploring a Topic through Questioning” to be particularly interesting. Clark provides many examples of questions that can be used, all broken up into what the teacher would hope the questions would eventually lead to. This is also something that I believe the students would be able to carry with them in the future to help them with writing both in and out of the school setting.

Alyssa Campbell

3/15/2022 04:08:51 pm

Throughout the different readings, and perhaps because of the work we have just finished doing with Inoue and analyzing his sources, I found myself, time and again, connecting what we were reading to him. Any time the word "community" was mentioned, I was immediately reminded of Asao Inoue's concept of the ecosystem and how that applies in the classroom. Thinking more broadly than that too, one can see how writing and reading allow the interconnectedness of the learners out there to really grow.

One quote from Clark that allowed me to really think deeply about some of these concepts was: “Are ideas 'created' through the active mind, and generated new and fresh from within?” (p. 48). It got me thinking about something that I haven't thought about since middle school, really, this idea that everything I have ever thought of may have been thought of by someone else already, but I would never know it. I think about this same idea weirdly in TikTok trends, where people share odd things or thoughts from their childhoods that they thought were unique to them and were really held by many people across the country or even the world.

Another piece that stood out to me, not of the reading but in the actual question prompt itself, is this line: "The classroom discourages authentic engagement in this work." This struck a chord with me. How and why is this the case? I understand that we need to get the quantity and certain outcomes in preparation for the tests and the types of writing expected of students, but surely this just seems counterintuitive! It is true, though, and really resonates with me and my experiences growing up as someone who "loved writing," but didn't love "school writing," also known as the academic writing or the writing that teaches you how to get a good score on a test, not on how to form your own coherent thoughts and opinions and support and back it in your own interesting style. Creativity is not taught in school; creativity is something innate and slowly but surely, we systematically have students remove it from so many aspects of their writing, and yet we wonder why students seem to love creative writing so much more.

In terms of revision, I am reminded too of all of the times growing up that I felt high and mighty in my understanding of the rules of grammar and I excelled at the revision/editing stages, while other students struggled because it was so mystified. Students that "got it" or saw through the mist and got the bigger picture were rewarded by being considered good writers, while students that did not see how the pieces connected got more frustrated because writing was so mystifying to them.

Post 2 of 2 for 3.15.2022 Invention&revision

Leave a Reply.

ENGL 513

Archives

Categories