Comments for text on the beach

Comment on the “middle range” of empirical research (CCR 635) by LaToya

LaToya — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:34:20 +0000

Thanks for the breakdown, Seth. As I read Bazerman, I thought the same thing about the applicability of Bazerman’s approach to our writing classes, such as 205. His approach helped me to make sense of my own work – almost like the map in the mall that says “you are here!” I think the most important thing that I have gleaned from our reading on meths and methodologies thus far, is that our methodological choices must be rhetorical and can not be an “either/ or” move.

Comment on the “middle range” of empirical research (CCR 635) by benkuebrich

benkuebrich — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:01:30 +0000

Thanks for the summary, Seth. As I read, I was thinking of how useful these steps could be for our writing students, especially in the more research intensive 205 courses. It helps me to think of processes and stages because so often me and my students (I imagine) drown in a sea of data and don’t know how to follow our research questions to productive ends.

I’d like to have this shared vocab with students so I can say “You’re in a research episode right now, but you haven’t generated a specifying question yet.” I’m sure they would be comforted.

Comment on postmodern argumentation (part 2) by sdlong

sdlong — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:05:50 +0000

Thanks for the comment, Rhoda. I don’t think your position is unusual at all, and I think your reading of it is absolutely correct: Left, Right, Liberal, Conservative, Socialist, Capitalist . . . very few people are willing to admit that, hey, maybe they aren’t seeing the whole picture, or that maybe they are oversimplifying things. When I debate issues with friends or family, I try to keep 3 things in the back of my mind to keep things respectful:

1. There’s no way that the mess of ideas and thoughts in my head is so unchanging and god-like that they could possibly be “the right ideas and thoughts” about the world. Maybe some are, maybe some aren’t. Figuring out which are which is the hard part.

2. The other person’s perspective will probably have something valuable to offer; I don’t have to agree with EVERYTHING they say to agree with SOME things.

3. Let’s be real. None of our debates or discussions are going to effect things, and nothing will be decided for sure. There should be a sense of play and friendliness in verbal debates. Friends and family members should ideally be able to duke it out and still laugh about it afterward at dinner together. It’s all about the spirit of the debate.

Comment on postmodern argumentation (part 2) by rhodajlewis

rhodajlewis — Tue, 31 Jan 2012 20:42:06 +0000

You said this so well! I would love to discuss so many subjects (politics, ethics, religion, art, books, music, science) openly and honestly with my friends and family, but find myself hiding my doubts and questions and just allowing them to dominate the conversation because their minds are so completely made up; and I just want to keep the peace rather than stirring up an argument that could drive a wedge in our relationships. I am in the (unusual?) position of having mainly liberal friends and a conservative and very religious family. I am always struck by the similarity in the way I feel when the conversation turns to a subject of controversy in either group. Both groups prevent real discussion by making derisive comments about the intelligence or morality of those who disagree with them. It is so unfortunate because these subjects are so worth discussing! I am only occasionally brave enough to question them. Your article makes me realize that I should really work to find a way.

Comment on The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders (CCR 635) by ippandey

ippandey — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:14:06 +0000

“A human writing process”! I am intrigued!!

Comment on The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders (CCR 635) by ippandey

ippandey — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:08:24 +0000

Thoughtful discussion here, too. I also liked that Tim mentioned this post while responding to LaToya’s comment. More later!

Comment on The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders (CCR 635) by sdlong

sdlong — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:46:57 +0000

I may be wrong here, Seth 1, but I’m thinking that our artistic sensibilities definitely make us skeptical toward the idea of “composing aloud” (before or after the fact) as a valuable window into a student’s writing process. Novelists, poets, lyricists . . . they’re all pretty unanimous, across cultural lines, about how to describe their writing processes: We Have No F—ing Idea. I can’t remember who it was, but I know of one author who admitted to a journalist, “If I tell you about how I write, I’ll just be lying to you.”

I think the more time a writer spends on creative pursuits (as I think you and I do, or once did), the more s/he becomes confronted with the complexity, contradictions, and same-but-different recursions of the writing process; thus confronted, the creative writer comes to understand that, no indeed, s/he has no f—ing idea about his/her writing process. If we can’t know our own, how could we possibly generalize about other peoples’?

Comment on The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders (CCR 635) by sdlong

sdlong — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:37:44 +0000

Kate, I agree 100% that, as compositionists and humanities-based teachers of writing, our empirical research should be conducted with the goal of illuminating particular aspects of the writing process with particular groups of students. And I like the humility of admitting that the results of such studies “may or may not be useful” beyond the cases or populations studied. It’s like, Here’s what we found out about these students; try it out, see if it works for you. That may sound unscientific, but hey, insofar as we’re humanists, we don’t have to be scientific.

Now, I still do think that, maybe, there is something like “A Human Writing Process” in terms of brain function, gross and fine motor movement, and psycholinguistic operations. However, studying “the” writing process through these more scientific lenses would provide results that may be useless to the teacher of writing. To describe the writing process through such “terministic screens” would provide fascinating information, but its value to teachers of writing would probably be limited . . . . Just like all the kinesiological knowledge in the world won’t necessarily inspire people to get off the couch, start exercising, and keep exercising. That takes a coach who possesses a different type of knowledge and skill.

Comment on The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders (CCR 635) by Kate Navickas

Kate Navickas — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 17:07:16 +0000

Response to 3.5

Seth I think you’re right to question the possibility of generalizing the human writing process. It makes me wonder if we can’t establish more limited, reasonable goals for empirical research on the writing process though. For instance, is it really the best goal to be aiming for results that can be generalized to describe some take on “THE” writing process? (not that I think you’re arguing that here) As if such a universal generalization is ever possible. But, I wonder if it might be possible to imagine a more carefully done case study that simply illuminated particular aspects of the writing process of a specific group of students (in a specific time and at a specific place). The insights from this study certainly wouldn’t be any ultimate truth about the writing process, but rather insights into particular cases of writing that may or may not be useful to particular people writing.

I guess I’m only suggesting that it’s possible to imagine reasonable and limited goals that make empirical research on the writing process more useful and believable.

Comment on The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders (CCR 635) by sethedavis

sethedavis — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 04:34:12 +0000

1.5 & 1.5.5. Precisely since it was the first of its kind, I feel we should treat it as somewhat of a launching pad. I can’t really get mad at Thomas Edison’s light bulb for not giving me a Jersey Shore style tan. *shrug* However at the same time, it is not above reproach. It is necessary to keep Emig’s foibles in mind when crafting our own research. It’s corny but true. I believe that this is a valuable research site and that a lot could be gleaned from this type of research but honestly I am skeptical of all results. I just feel like the composing process may be a bit too complicated and for lack of a better word… phenomenal to be simplified.
2. This was definitely my introduction to the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. However, I see why you used it. I’ll try to include that in my lecture tomorrow. Lol! Again, I give Emig somewhat of a pass on this, especially since I still cannot really conceptualize how I would get at similar data. However, it is also hard for me to place myself in the students’ shoes. Even as a doctoral student, I do not think that I would have the ability to verbalize my composing process. We have talked about this process in Patrick’s and maybe in Steve’s classes and each time I found myself struggling to remember what the hell I did in order to craft my last masterpiece. If someone asked me while I was “composing,” they would probably be met with a stream of profanities that would then end the research all together. I’m joking. Kinda. “Even (my) silence can be characterized.” Are we serious?
3 & 3.5 This is where I feel that you give Emig more of a pass than I would necessarily on her attempt at simplifying phenomena, which I have to admit I have somewhat of a mental block against. However, it’s good to see that you seem as dubious about how “fruitful,” such an endeavor is (I think I detect Seth sarcasm). Personally, I just do not see how composing out loud is helpful in understanding anyone’s writing process. If we do believe writing is a recursive process, I could possibly understand the reformulation method following the old “hindsight is 20/20” adage, which would suggest that students have a better understanding of their composing process after its finished. Even though, I guess I could call myself a professional writer. Yet I can’t tell you much about my process. That may be Emig’s job/project though…
3.5.5. Exactly! When I read this section, I thought about writing the good ole term paper (thinking more rhetoric than social sciences but both work), where you may come up with thoughtful and profound research questions. Then after performing your analysis and into writing your conclusion/discussion you realize that you have stumbled upon more intriguing territory, which forces you to alter research questions. These conscious or perhaps subconscious choices have changed the scoop of the whole paper. Through working with the data, you are able to determine what truly makes your study “’fruitful.” I think this is one of those nuggets that you can take from Emig’s piece.