There is a problem that impacts so many of us in school, and even though some are aware of the problem, it continues to mislead students for the worse. When I was an undergrad, I was taught many "rules" on writing, such as: every paragraph should be 5-7 sentences long and every thesis statements I write must be short and clear and appear at the end of my introduction. These "rules" are better expressed as guidelines; however, the problem arises when these guidelines, when enforced as rules, cause students to think that writing professionally is mostly about self-expression. All writing is an expression of humanity in some form or other: a scientific report may reflect the writer's human desire to learn more about the outside world, whereas a poem may reflect the poet's desire to explore personal trauma. Consequently, the personal, or "human," element of writing must not be ignored. That being said, students need to see writing as something other than just personal but something rhetorical. Specifically, students must see their writings as tools worthy of their target audiences' attention, especially OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM. Many students may understand this notion well, but ALL students should internalize this notion because readers outside school will NOT care about students' writings--or anyone's writings--unless the readers consider the writings valuable. Hence, students in writing classes are often taught how to become better students who have to write about their thoughts for teachers who are paid to care about their students. The students, however, must be taught differently: they need to become thinkers prepared to write inside and, more importantly, outside school. Granted, this may already be happening all across the country to some extent, but I doubt this rhetorical imperative to write for readers other than teachers is being emphasized enough. Recently, I watched a lecture on YouTube that explores the conclusions in bold above. The video's presenter, Professor Larry McEnerney, deconstructs the traditional model on how to teach students how to write, ultimately arguing for a better model, one, in fact, based on world-world practicality rather than the helpful, though wildly arbitrary "rules" of writing. Lei Xun, a person on YouTube, posted a list summarizing the professor's points in detail. Here's the list: 1. This course is not about writing rules 3:04 2. Stop thinking about rules and start thinking about readers 3:55 3. The problems that domain experts have in their writing 4:00 4. Domain experts use writing to help themselves with thinking 4:51, if they don't do it this way, they can't think to the level they need 5. The challenge: the way that experts do their writing (to help with their thinking) is different to the way that readers can understand 6:53 6. The consequences 8:10 - 1. readers need to slow down and re-read many times 2. readers can't understand or misunderstand 3. readers give up 7. Readers read things that are valuable to them 11:52 8. Writings need to be clear, organized, persuasive and VALUABLE 13:45 9. Valuable to the readers of a research area (not everybody in the world) 15:20 10. An example of comparing two writings 17:16 11. Writing is not about communicating your ideas, it is about changing readers' ideas 21:24 12. Nothing will be accepted as knowledge or understanding until it has been challenged by people who have the competence to challenge 23:24, this determines the readers of our writing 13. A piece of writing is important, not because it is new and original; It is because it has value to some readers 25:16 14. What does the world of knowledge look like 28:00 15. Every research communities have their own code to communicate VALUE 31:30 16. Why does it take 5-6 years to get a PhD? 34:30 50% of the time is used to know the readers in the field 17. Using these words to show that you are aware of the research communities: widely, accepted, and reported 35:24 18. Flow/transition words can help to make writing preservative and organized: and, but, because, unless, nonetheless, however, although, etc. 36:00 19. Do things under the code of the communities 42:00 20. Another example 44:25 21. The function of a piece of writing is to move a research area forward, not to be preserved for 500 years 46:54 22. Writing is not about to express what is in our head, it is about changing other people's thoughts 48:50 23. The instability words that create tension/challenge: anomaly, inconsistent, but, however, although 54:00 24. Bad writing style: backgroud+thesis 55:07 and a better style: problem+solution 56:18 25. Learn the language code from the target publications 1:01:30 26. Literature review is used to enrich the problem 1:02:50 27. Problem vs background 1:06:47 28. Gap in the knowledge is dangerous 1:08:45 29. Identify the right readers (research communities) is important, but it could be difficult for interdisciplinary research 1:11:57 In isolation, many of the points above may not mean that much; therefore, I encourage every writer to watch the professor's video and judge whether the video holds merit. I suspect many who study this video will see writing inside and outside school differently.* Writing rules in the strictest sense do not exist and should matter less than the relationship between one's writings and one's target audience. When students, or any other writers, write, they should say, "What is the purpose of my writings? Are they clear, organized, and persuasive? Whom are they for? Why? Why would my target audience care about or VALUE my work? What might they learn about the world from reading my work? What will they gain from reading my work?" *I post the video below for the sake of convenience.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |