Robin,+4,+Ivanic,+Clark,+Processes+&+Practices

Robin, 4, Ivanic/Clark, Processes/Practices

This article illuminates the difference between the chaotic writing process as a linear form and their proposed refined and expanded chaotic writing practice as an integrated form. The authors, have taken apart the subtleties connected to writing process in general by detailing the “when and how we write” contexts to clarify linear models. It is not especially easy reading, but it’s not quite excruciating either. If you stick with it to the end, you can see the point they’re driving at, though there may have been a quicker way to get there. The diagrams go a long way to clarifying the concept, their explanation of the organization they suggest lies at the heart of why they think this approach an improvement, or at least a more accurate perspective than earlier models.

My difficulty is I do not see practical applications for the instruction of writing in an educational setting, the authors allude to college writing early in the article, though I don’t see their model-they’re-not-calling-a-model (98) with its flow and ebb as more than slightly applicable to post-secondary teaching. They do use a contextualized example very well to demonstrate the applications in personal or professional writing situations of less-defined time restraints. But if the authors are suggesting this is the model that should be reflected in curriculum, a suggested theory of how to implement or modify would have been appreciated; other than broad time restraints (which don’t work as well as you would think in secondary schools) possible adaptations for assessment are not apparent.

I found interesting the early comparisons between writing and speaking and the spontaneity of each and the advantages and disadvantages between the situational contexts, I hadn’t really given much earlier thought to why these situation’s differences lead me to a preference of one over the other depending on circumstances (I dread speaking – most of the time). I’m glad the authors articulated that interesting nugget; although it probably wasn’t necessary, as the main difference, the opportunity to revise beforehand in writing, is the rather obvious difference. It isn’t clear to me why they chose this topic to headline their main topic, of discussing in detail the writing models, because it seems to me more like a friction fit. But, as I said, it was interesting in a sidebar kind of way.