The Composition Process Janet Emig Analysis
In “The Composition Process: Review of the Literature”, Janet Emig uses research evidence to support her perspective on the writing process as unable to be researched scientifically. Using interviews and other data gathered from professional writers, Emig highlights the difficulty of narrowing writing processes down to the one superior method that students should learn in composition class. She points out specific errors in the data and accuses them of being “unsystematic”, self-contradicting, and inadequate in explaining “how students of school age should write” (Emig 228). Furthermore, she argues that common composition textbooks specifically objectify students and remove inspiration, creativity, and personal experience from writing (Emig
…show more content…
In doing so, Sommers supports her argument that the current revision process taught in schools, as part of a general, linear writing process, is failing to prepare students to be critical thinkers and to use their critical thinking skills to identify bigger issues in their writing and become good writers (Sommers 327). She argues that the reason for this failure is the perpetual view of writing as a comparison to oratory (Sommers 323). Hence, students focus too much on the actual words and not enough on what they want to do with the words; they worry about following the rules rather than getting their ideas across on paper (Sommers 326-327). Similarly, she argues that students believe the purpose of revision is to identify the technical mistakes within their papers; this perspective is distinct from experienced writers who view revision as a time to rethink their missions and the best ways to execute them in writing (Sommers 328). Sommers’ use of students’ perspectives on revision as compared to experienced writers’ perspectives is a clear example of how students are learning a fallacy in the classroom regarding their writing. They are learning that writing is founded on rules and teachers’ expectations rather than on their own opinions and …show more content…
In doing so, they remove the focus off of creating rule-followers and on to creating critically thinking, self-efficient writers. Currently, schools teach students how to write using one method. This method restricts students from using their own experiences and knowledge to form ideas and then express these ideas efficiently. Today’s linear writing processes devalue revision and make writing more about individual words separate from the writer’s message. However, Emig and Sommers’ ideas take “right” and “wrong” out of writing and encourage personal rhetoric based upon personal experience and
In doing so, Sommers supports her argument that the current revision process taught in schools, as part of a general, linear writing process, is failing to prepare students to be critical thinkers and to use their critical thinking skills to identify bigger issues in their writing and become good writers (Sommers 327). She argues that the reason for this failure is the perpetual view of writing as a comparison to oratory (Sommers 323). Hence, students focus too much on the actual words and not enough on what they want to do with the words; they worry about following the rules rather than getting their ideas across on paper (Sommers 326-327). Similarly, she argues that students believe the purpose of revision is to identify the technical mistakes within their papers; this perspective is distinct from experienced writers who view revision as a time to rethink their missions and the best ways to execute them in writing (Sommers 328). Sommers’ use of students’ perspectives on revision as compared to experienced writers’ perspectives is a clear example of how students are learning a fallacy in the classroom regarding their writing. They are learning that writing is founded on rules and teachers’ expectations rather than on their own opinions and …show more content…
In doing so, they remove the focus off of creating rule-followers and on to creating critically thinking, self-efficient writers. Currently, schools teach students how to write using one method. This method restricts students from using their own experiences and knowledge to form ideas and then express these ideas efficiently. Today’s linear writing processes devalue revision and make writing more about individual words separate from the writer’s message. However, Emig and Sommers’ ideas take “right” and “wrong” out of writing and encourage personal rhetoric based upon personal experience and