If I had been asked to write a theory of writing one month ago, or even one week ago, I would have been at a loss. Although I have read many essays and theories of writing, few of them truly resonated with me. I would find sections of the essays that I would get excited about and could relate to but they would soon relapse into monotonous theoretical English discourse. However, the essay “Collaborative Learning” by Bruffee intrigued me and caused me to remodel my previous beliefs on writing theory.
One theory of writing is utilizing it as a way to make meaning. I liked this concept when I first read Bizzell’s "William Perry and Liberal Education" but at first could not see its practical applications. However, Bruffee refined this idea and put it into a context that I thought to be quite brilliant despite my initial skepticism. His proposal was that writing should be taught through “collaborative learning.” Since writing is externalizing thoughts through a medium and conversation is externalizing thoughts through talking, the best way to improve writing is to practice and refine thinking and conversing within a discourse. Collaborative learning allows students to engage in the "normal discourse," or conversation that they will be using in any field they choose with their peers. It is practice for writing and communicating not necessarily in the discourse that they will enter, but practice in the writing that will help them to attain this discourse. He also talked about the illusion of the authority of knowledge. It is easy to assume that those who “know more” or are more educated are automatically higher on the status ladder and students must jump through rings before attaining the authority to be an active member in a discourse. However, if this is the active school of thought, minimal knowledge will be gained because everyone is working to obtain knowledge that has already been established instead of thinking and talking about new ideas although they might not have the authority to do so. Although this was not an adequate synopsis of Bruffee's brilliant claims, I hope that it reflected some of the revolutionary and insighful ideas he proposed.
I feel as though English in college now is either too focused on adopting an argumentative and formal writing that is too contrived or it attempts to integrate today’s society by putting a media focused spin on rhetoric and analysis. However, writing classes have the potential to be much more than this. Writing can be practice in thinking, collaborating, and making connections between ideas. These are not skills to be mastered, but practice in thinking about the world that will benefit students not just in English classes but throughout college and life. After all, a college education should not just be focused on attaining skills but making connections and learning to collaborate with colleagues. English classes could be revolutionized to optimize student’s experience and perception of writing and enhance their college experience. These experiences form the foundation for future education and careers instead of specializing to early and creating a one dimensional idea of writing. Ultimately, this is not a theory of writing but a proposal for change. My beliefs about how writing is and should be taught has continually changed while reading a range of theories, however, one constant has been my skepticism with the application of theories. Most identify a need for change and can explain why but few address how to do this. This is why my "theory of writing" is a commitment to change and improvement through revolutionizing writing education to benefit students and society.
Although this post is somewhat of a failure to develop a theory of writing, it has helped me to see a new angle to approach how writing should be taught. So I'll take that and consider this long, convoluted blog post to be a success in my own mind, if not my readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment