Grad Class 5020 2016-09-26 21:15:00

This blog will contain my thoughts about different texts that I read about the craft and structure of writing. It is my hope that I will walk away from this experience knowing just a little bit more about the theories of writing. 

When I am done with this course I want to take my girls back to Universal Studios in Florida so that we can have some of this delicious butterbeer. I sacrificed our trip this summer for my classes. Next summer, we will make up for it for sure. Maybe even take a kid free trip with the hubby. Either way, this pic is my inspiration for this course!

Grad Class 5020 2016-09-26 21:15:00

This blog will contain my thoughts about different texts that I read about the craft and structure of writing. It is my hope that I will walk away from this experience knowing just a little bit more about the theories of writing. 

When I am done with this course I want to take my girls back to Universal Studios in Florida so that we can have some of this delicious butterbeer. I sacrificed our trip this summer for my classes. Next summer, we will make up for it for sure. Maybe even take a kid free trip with the hubby. Either way, this pic is my inspiration for this course!

Writing Theory & Practice 2016-09-26 20:52:00

Last Monday was our first class getting underway with our readings! We read “Rhetoric and Composition” by Janice M. Lauer, which was a bit dry, but informative nonetheless and a strong foundational kick off to the class. My classmates and I, especially those who are teachers, were in agreement that as we were reading, we wished we had guided questions to focus our task. In essence, the article included soooo much information that we wanted to know what was important to bring to our discussion and what we were expected to talk about. Dr. Zamora told us that she wants us to decide what is important and what we want to get out of these articles. I teach middle school, and I think that is the one phrase they hate the most when I answer their questions: “Whatever you think is important” or when they ask if something is “long” enough and I respond with, “You tell me.” However, as I completed the readings for this week, I very much kept in mind what Dr. Zamora said and decided to make my own meaning out of these articles.


“One Approach to Guiding Peer Response”
By Kim Jaxon
The first article for this week was “One Approach to Guiding Peer Response” by Kim Jaxon and I was hooked from the moment I read the title. The first thing I loved about this article was that Jaxon titles it “ONE” approach, not claiming to have “THE” approach to guiding peer response, but rather letting her reader know there are many and the one she is about to describe is simply one that worked in her classroom. Bringing me to my second immediate response to this article: she is a teacher. She is writing through her personal experience, but what makes Jaxon stand out to me is her use of Appendixes to showcase student examples that support her explanations of techniques. I have read articles and been to countless professional development where strategies are explained without providing concrete examples. As a teacher, I like to leave PD or finish an article with concrete ideas and lessons I can use in my classroom, and after reading this article, I cannot wait to implement guided peer responses in my classroom!
In “One Approach to Guiding Peer Response”, Jaxon discusses using peer responses in her classroom. She designed an approach where students understand that “knowledge is created in dialogue with others” and provides a context for students to understand why they are doing the work they are doing. She claims that structured and guided peer responses allow students the ability to learn from each other, take pride in sharing their work and ownership of it, as their peers will be reading it, along with allowing students to reflect on their own approaches. She also outlines the best approaches for guided peer response, including: Peer to Peer Memos, creating guided questions enforcing the importance of reading and rereading the first draft outside of the classroom, avoiding grammar mistakes, and focusing on two or three substantive ideas.

As I was reading, I was reflecting on my practice of peer response. I’ll admit, when I planned my peer response days, I viewed them as an “easy” day for me. I would create a peer response sheet or guide and the students would work to complete them, return the paper to their peer, MAYBE discuss their thoughts, and then the individuals would spend the rest of their time revising. I knew I needed a better system, but unfortunately was bogged down with the rest of the curriculum that I sacrificed peer responses. This article has jolted me awake. Peer response is a pivotal component of the writing process and one that students struggle with. By changing my thinking about peer response, I hope to be able to change theirs. My goal for this upcoming school year is to train them to think analytically about their peers paper, including the components Jaxon suggests, such as providing suggestions but explaining why the peer is suggesting that. I will take the time to plan lessons where we work together to create guided questions, or work together to create peer responses on one assignment, Which brings me to the question: Where can we get a copy of the “Needle Exchange Essay?”

“Reflection in the Writing Classroom”
by Yancey
While fresh off reading Jaxon’s ideas regarding guided peer responses, I was eager to build upon my ideas through reading Yancey’s “Reflection in the Writing Classroom.” The two texts were paired together beautifully, as each dealt with the concept of reflection. While Jaxon offered a way for students to engage in meaningful reflection, Yancy chose to present her research on reflection, beginning by defining reflection in a number of ways. She references reflection as a process of dialogue where we must first set specific goals, develop strategies to reach those goals, and then decide on means of determining if we have met those goals. My interpretation is that reflection is very much goal driven, but according to Michael Polanyi, identifying the problem is the first step of reflection. He explains that for any discovery or any act of creation, you must be able to see a hidden problem is the only way to begin knowing, or reflecting. From there, the goal setting can begin.
Yancy continues to explain that there are three types of reflection: reflection-in-action, constructive reflection, and reflection-in-presentation. Each of these reflective processes builds upon the other, and translates from writers to our profession as teachers as well. Reflection is not simply thinking about your work, but it is process-oriented. According to the article, “reflection entails a looking forward to goals…as well as a casting backward to see where we have been.” I find this incredibly interesting. As I was reminded while reading Jaxson’s piece, I do not hold my students to the same standard as a hold myself. As a teacher, I am constantly engaging in the reflective dialogue, both with myself and my colleagues. We participate in the internal and external dialogue of refining our practice and growing our ideas. We identify the problems in our teaching and discuss goals to improve upon them. However, I hand my students a revision guide/editing checklist and expect that to suffice. Sure, I conference with my students, especially during this stage, but it is not enough. Revision/editing is also looked upon as the final stage before the final submitted for a grade draft. Revision is a process though, not the final step. It is something students should actively be participating in at every step of the way. I find that they view it as “correcting” when that is not the case at all. I recognize that this may be a flaw in my presentation and expectation of “revision” and after reading this article, I have “revised” my own beliefs. I believe that revision should take place at all times and through all mediums, from interacting with the thoughts on the page, to in your head, to the thoughts of the peers around you. I believe that Jaxon’s practice of guided peer responses is one strategy I can employ to get my students thinking about revision in a different matter.

One major idea jumped out at me as I was reading, at that was the idea of holding students accountable. Teaching eighth graders especially, I preach the concept of being accountable, but it is normally centered around being responsible for doing, completing, and turning in assignments on time. I have not thought about the idea of accountability in writing until now. Yancey mentions that historically, the school model is that students learn and teachers judge. She states, “…students are not responsible at all for knowing their own texts; teachers will do that-come to know the texts-in the process of judging them” (18). This was a moment of realization for me that this “historic” idea is SO TRUE! My immediate thought was that our eighth graders are the epitome of this.  They are responsible for creating a thesis paper for the second half of their year. The research begins in Social Studies around February, with the Language Arts teachers picking up the writing aspect right around spring break, with the final paper due the first week of June. We take them through the researching state, the outlining state, and the constructing your ideas in ways that make sense state, and let’s be honest, it keeps those crazy, “I’m basically in high school and over middle school” eighth graders busy at the end of the year. We tell them to pick a topic they care about because they’ll be working with it for so long, and most of them do, and do a decent job, but do they know their writing? DO they know their texts? No. I truly do not believe they do. They know how to follow a formula and they know what the teachers expect. So I think it’s about time we change our expectation. Let’s raise the stakes for our students and foster intellectual, and reflective, thinkers!

Writing Theory & Practice 2016-09-26 20:52:00

Last Monday was our first class getting underway with our readings! We read “Rhetoric and Composition” by Janice M. Lauer, which was a bit dry, but informative nonetheless and a strong foundational kick off to the class. My classmates and I, especially those who are teachers, were in agreement that as we were reading, we wished we had guided questions to focus our task. In essence, the article included soooo much information that we wanted to know what was important to bring to our discussion and what we were expected to talk about. Dr. Zamora told us that she wants us to decide what is important and what we want to get out of these articles. I teach middle school, and I think that is the one phrase they hate the most when I answer their questions: “Whatever you think is important” or when they ask if something is “long” enough and I respond with, “You tell me.” However, as I completed the readings for this week, I very much kept in mind what Dr. Zamora said and decided to make my own meaning out of these articles.


“One Approach to Guiding Peer Response”
By Kim Jaxon
The first article for this week was “One Approach to Guiding Peer Response” by Kim Jaxon and I was hooked from the moment I read the title. The first thing I loved about this article was that Jaxon titles it “ONE” approach, not claiming to have “THE” approach to guiding peer response, but rather letting her reader know there are many and the one she is about to describe is simply one that worked in her classroom. Bringing me to my second immediate response to this article: she is a teacher. She is writing through her personal experience, but what makes Jaxon stand out to me is her use of Appendixes to showcase student examples that support her explanations of techniques. I have read articles and been to countless professional development where strategies are explained without providing concrete examples. As a teacher, I like to leave PD or finish an article with concrete ideas and lessons I can use in my classroom, and after reading this article, I cannot wait to implement guided peer responses in my classroom!
In “One Approach to Guiding Peer Response”, Jaxon discusses using peer responses in her classroom. She designed an approach where students understand that “knowledge is created in dialogue with others” and provides a context for students to understand why they are doing the work they are doing. She claims that structured and guided peer responses allow students the ability to learn from each other, take pride in sharing their work and ownership of it, as their peers will be reading it, along with allowing students to reflect on their own approaches. She also outlines the best approaches for guided peer response, including: Peer to Peer Memos, creating guided questions enforcing the importance of reading and rereading the first draft outside of the classroom, avoiding grammar mistakes, and focusing on two or three substantive ideas.

As I was reading, I was reflecting on my practice of peer response. I’ll admit, when I planned my peer response days, I viewed them as an “easy” day for me. I would create a peer response sheet or guide and the students would work to complete them, return the paper to their peer, MAYBE discuss their thoughts, and then the individuals would spend the rest of their time revising. I knew I needed a better system, but unfortunately was bogged down with the rest of the curriculum that I sacrificed peer responses. This article has jolted me awake. Peer response is a pivotal component of the writing process and one that students struggle with. By changing my thinking about peer response, I hope to be able to change theirs. My goal for this upcoming school year is to train them to think analytically about their peers paper, including the components Jaxon suggests, such as providing suggestions but explaining why the peer is suggesting that. I will take the time to plan lessons where we work together to create guided questions, or work together to create peer responses on one assignment, Which brings me to the question: Where can we get a copy of the “Needle Exchange Essay?”

“Reflection in the Writing Classroom”
by Yancey
While fresh off reading Jaxon’s ideas regarding guided peer responses, I was eager to build upon my ideas through reading Yancey’s “Reflection in the Writing Classroom.” The two texts were paired together beautifully, as each dealt with the concept of reflection. While Jaxon offered a way for students to engage in meaningful reflection, Yancy chose to present her research on reflection, beginning by defining reflection in a number of ways. She references reflection as a process of dialogue where we must first set specific goals, develop strategies to reach those goals, and then decide on means of determining if we have met those goals. My interpretation is that reflection is very much goal driven, but according to Michael Polanyi, identifying the problem is the first step of reflection. He explains that for any discovery or any act of creation, you must be able to see a hidden problem is the only way to begin knowing, or reflecting. From there, the goal setting can begin.
Yancy continues to explain that there are three types of reflection: reflection-in-action, constructive reflection, and reflection-in-presentation. Each of these reflective processes builds upon the other, and translates from writers to our profession as teachers as well. Reflection is not simply thinking about your work, but it is process-oriented. According to the article, “reflection entails a looking forward to goals…as well as a casting backward to see where we have been.” I find this incredibly interesting. As I was reminded while reading Jaxson’s piece, I do not hold my students to the same standard as a hold myself. As a teacher, I am constantly engaging in the reflective dialogue, both with myself and my colleagues. We participate in the internal and external dialogue of refining our practice and growing our ideas. We identify the problems in our teaching and discuss goals to improve upon them. However, I hand my students a revision guide/editing checklist and expect that to suffice. Sure, I conference with my students, especially during this stage, but it is not enough. Revision/editing is also looked upon as the final stage before the final submitted for a grade draft. Revision is a process though, not the final step. It is something students should actively be participating in at every step of the way. I find that they view it as “correcting” when that is not the case at all. I recognize that this may be a flaw in my presentation and expectation of “revision” and after reading this article, I have “revised” my own beliefs. I believe that revision should take place at all times and through all mediums, from interacting with the thoughts on the page, to in your head, to the thoughts of the peers around you. I believe that Jaxon’s practice of guided peer responses is one strategy I can employ to get my students thinking about revision in a different matter.

One major idea jumped out at me as I was reading, at that was the idea of holding students accountable. Teaching eighth graders especially, I preach the concept of being accountable, but it is normally centered around being responsible for doing, completing, and turning in assignments on time. I have not thought about the idea of accountability in writing until now. Yancey mentions that historically, the school model is that students learn and teachers judge. She states, “…students are not responsible at all for knowing their own texts; teachers will do that-come to know the texts-in the process of judging them” (18). This was a moment of realization for me that this “historic” idea is SO TRUE! My immediate thought was that our eighth graders are the epitome of this.  They are responsible for creating a thesis paper for the second half of their year. The research begins in Social Studies around February, with the Language Arts teachers picking up the writing aspect right around spring break, with the final paper due the first week of June. We take them through the researching state, the outlining state, and the constructing your ideas in ways that make sense state, and let’s be honest, it keeps those crazy, “I’m basically in high school and over middle school” eighth graders busy at the end of the year. We tell them to pick a topic they care about because they’ll be working with it for so long, and most of them do, and do a decent job, but do they know their writing? DO they know their texts? No. I truly do not believe they do. They know how to follow a formula and they know what the teachers expect. So I think it’s about time we change our expectation. Let’s raise the stakes for our students and foster intellectual, and reflective, thinkers!

Blog:1 Peer Response and The Revision Process

Andaiye Hall
Professor Mia Zamora
English 5020*01
September 26, 2016
Peer Response and The Revision Process
I enjoyed reading “One Approach to Guiding Peer Response” by Kim Jaxon the most. It was very concise and straight to the point. During the reading, in the back of my mind I found myself disagreeing with some of the methods that were suggested. I had to remember that this was only “one approach.” The article “On Reflection” by Kathleen Yancey was a total disappointment to me. I expected a more in depth perspective of how students write reflections and what kind of reflections students write. Instead, the article became highly theoretical and really confusing for me to process the information. There was an abundance of historical information and many people of literary authority quoted within the article.  I originally expected to enjoy reading this piece page by page. In reality, once I started reading I was looking forward to reaching the end of the article. I will say that the article gave a lot of good points about what reflection is and what it is not.
Kim Jaxon has found that the revision is the most important thing in her writing classes. She uses her student’s feedback to remodel how she conducts peer responding in the classroom. She lets students engage in with purposes attach. She wants them to gain additional knowledge, get constructive feedback, and allows them to reflect on their own writing processes.
Her suggestion of taking home papers to respond to them seemed out of the ordinary to me. In college, I was never given the opportunity to take someone’s assignment home with me. It was necessary to give them feedback as soon as possible. Time is of the essence when you have another person’s piece of writing. I agreed that time to read the draft essay was necessary in peer response. Often in the classroom, the class would run out of time to respond to individual’s writing pieces. I’ve never considered creating guiding questions for papers. Normally, the main goal is to create a better paper and consider what the professor wants. Hardly, would a student actually give guiding questions for a peer. A common response would be “I don’t know, just tell me what needs work or tell me what you think about what I wrote.” I think guiding questions are a better thing to have in peer response. I’ve always been accustomed to trying to comment on grammar. I can’t stand seeing grammatical problems in people’s papers. This is something that I would need to get used to avoiding. In my college experience, peers have been able to give more than just 2-3 helpful suggestions. They often bring up things that I wonder how did I ever miss that. My questions regarding the article:
1.      What kind of benefits have students gotten from the peer responses they got?
2.      What are her other approaches to guiding peer responses? This seems pretty simple to me.
3.      Has she used technology such as Google Docs for peer responses?
Reflection is an accumulation of experiences, inner thoughts and accomplishments. This was a part of an experiment to figure out how students learn to write which we briefly touched in last class. The research was primarily done during 1970’s and 1980’s. Teachers wanted to move away from traditional viewpoints of how students learn to write. Students perspectives became centrally important.
When I reflect upon ideas, I have to dig into my personal experiences otherwise I have nothing to compare them with. I like the idea of students being seen as “authoritative informants.” (5) During class reflections, students get to spread around their knowledge to others and new knowledge in return.
1. Are students with mental disorders at a disadvantage in reflections?
2. How do you reflect on something you aren’t interested in?
3.  How do control reflections that are controversial and become very lengthy?

Blog:1 Peer Response and The Revision Process

Andaiye Hall
Professor Mia Zamora
English 5020*01
September 26, 2016
Peer Response and The Revision Process
I enjoyed reading “One Approach to Guiding Peer Response” by Kim Jaxon the most. It was very concise and straight to the point. During the reading, in the back of my mind I found myself disagreeing with some of the methods that were suggested. I had to remember that this was only “one approach.” The article “On Reflection” by Kathleen Yancey was a total disappointment to me. I expected a more in depth perspective of how students write reflections and what kind of reflections students write. Instead, the article became highly theoretical and really confusing for me to process the information. There was an abundance of historical information and many people of literary authority quoted within the article.  I originally expected to enjoy reading this piece page by page. In reality, once I started reading I was looking forward to reaching the end of the article. I will say that the article gave a lot of good points about what reflection is and what it is not.
Kim Jaxon has found that the revision is the most important thing in her writing classes. She uses her student’s feedback to remodel how she conducts peer responding in the classroom. She lets students engage in with purposes attach. She wants them to gain additional knowledge, get constructive feedback, and allows them to reflect on their own writing processes.
Her suggestion of taking home papers to respond to them seemed out of the ordinary to me. In college, I was never given the opportunity to take someone’s assignment home with me. It was necessary to give them feedback as soon as possible. Time is of the essence when you have another person’s piece of writing. I agreed that time to read the draft essay was necessary in peer response. Often in the classroom, the class would run out of time to respond to individual’s writing pieces. I’ve never considered creating guiding questions for papers. Normally, the main goal is to create a better paper and consider what the professor wants. Hardly, would a student actually give guiding questions for a peer. A common response would be “I don’t know, just tell me what needs work or tell me what you think about what I wrote.” I think guiding questions are a better thing to have in peer response. I’ve always been accustomed to trying to comment on grammar. I can’t stand seeing grammatical problems in people’s papers. This is something that I would need to get used to avoiding. In my college experience, peers have been able to give more than just 2-3 helpful suggestions. They often bring up things that I wonder how did I ever miss that. My questions regarding the article:
1.      What kind of benefits have students gotten from the peer responses they got?
2.      What are her other approaches to guiding peer responses? This seems pretty simple to me.
3.      Has she used technology such as Google Docs for peer responses?
Reflection is an accumulation of experiences, inner thoughts and accomplishments. This was a part of an experiment to figure out how students learn to write which we briefly touched in last class. The research was primarily done during 1970’s and 1980’s. Teachers wanted to move away from traditional viewpoints of how students learn to write. Students perspectives became centrally important.
When I reflect upon ideas, I have to dig into my personal experiences otherwise I have nothing to compare them with. I like the idea of students being seen as “authoritative informants.” (5) During class reflections, students get to spread around their knowledge to others and new knowledge in return.
1. Are students with mental disorders at a disadvantage in reflections?
2. How do you reflect on something you aren’t interested in?
3.  How do control reflections that are controversial and become very lengthy?

the significance of self and peer revision in writing

After reading the articles, I wholeheartedly agree with both Yancey’s and Jaxon’s concepts about how reflection and peer revision, respectively, better your ability to write. Ultimately, the most significant connection between the two articles I saw was the importance of grounding yourself in objectivity while reading writing – whether it is yours or your peer’s. Both seem to push the idea of leaving your subjective views of your paper behind; for example, in Yancey’s article, she discusses the writer’s self-reflection at great length. By rereading your work and constructively revising and adding to the textual conversation of your paper, I feel like you are being trained to look less and less subjectively at your own words. Instead of rereading your paper and thinking it is good and does not need much changing, you are not doing yourself any favors; however, if you are able to see missing ideas and critically develop the paper by pretending you are a third-party viewer, it will increase your writing abilities because of the objective thinking you have practiced while reflecting.

Similarly, I feel like Jaxon talks about peer tutoring in the same light. For an individual to successfully be able peer tutor, they need to adapt a different identity entirely, since they now become something akin to their professor. If that concept of peer tutoring is realized, the student will try to become more “serious” and thoughtful while reading their peer’s work; by doing so, you take yourself out of subjective thinking, which includes personal bias. While you may take into consideration what you have written versus what your peer as written, you are using it to constructively develop both of your writing abilities. Like Jaxon says, if you are able to effectively peer tutor and analyze their thoughts, you consequently learn how to write a more well-rounded and better paper yourself.

As said before, I feel like Jaxon and Yancey hit the nail on the head. While being a writing center tutor is different than just regular peer tutoring, they are still related on some level. While working at the writing center, as I was reading and helping students, I was able to help myself; in all honestly, I could see my writing develop over the years of working there. To start with, papers become very easy to write for me, which was mostly attributed to the fact I had learned how to structure my thoughts, the flow of the text, and making sure the overall focus was there. Ultimately, I feel as though Yancey was able to summarize the importance of the necessity of reflection in writing, where she stated that “reflection is a critical component of learning and writing specifically; articulating what we have learned for ourselves is a key process in that learning” (7). By learning from the writing mistakes of my students, my skill increased in writing too, since I was more effectively able to practice what I was preaching to them. Additionally, in rereading my papers in an objective light, as well as being able to add to them in a way that is “conversational” also is a good tool to improve individual writing; without the ability to look critically at our own writing as an “outsider,” it is very easy to be blind to our own flaws, and even harder to accept that we have any to begin with, which is why accepting the objectivity of revision is so important to improving your own writing.

the significance of self and peer revision in writing

After reading the articles, I wholeheartedly agree with both Yancey’s and Jaxon’s concepts about how reflection and peer revision, respectively, better your ability to write. Ultimately, the most significant connection between the two articles I saw was the importance of grounding yourself in objectivity while reading writing – whether it is yours or your peer’s. Both seem to push the idea of leaving your subjective views of your paper behind; for example, in Yancey’s article, she discusses the writer’s self-reflection at great length. By rereading your work and constructively revising and adding to the textual conversation of your paper, I feel like you are being trained to look less and less subjectively at your own words. Instead of rereading your paper and thinking it is good and does not need much changing, you are not doing yourself any favors; however, if you are able to see missing ideas and critically develop the paper by pretending you are a third-party viewer, it will increase your writing abilities because of the objective thinking you have practiced while reflecting.

Similarly, I feel like Jaxon talks about peer tutoring in the same light. For an individual to successfully be able peer tutor, they need to adapt a different identity entirely, since they now become something akin to their professor. If that concept of peer tutoring is realized, the student will try to become more “serious” and thoughtful while reading their peer’s work; by doing so, you take yourself out of subjective thinking, which includes personal bias. While you may take into consideration what you have written versus what your peer as written, you are using it to constructively develop both of your writing abilities. Like Jaxon says, if you are able to effectively peer tutor and analyze their thoughts, you consequently learn how to write a more well-rounded and better paper yourself.

As said before, I feel like Jaxon and Yancey hit the nail on the head. While being a writing center tutor is different than just regular peer tutoring, they are still related on some level. While working at the writing center, as I was reading and helping students, I was able to help myself; in all honestly, I could see my writing develop over the years of working there. To start with, papers become very easy to write for me, which was mostly attributed to the fact I had learned how to structure my thoughts, the flow of the text, and making sure the overall focus was there. Ultimately, I feel as though Yancey was able to summarize the importance of the necessity of reflection in writing, where she stated that “reflection is a critical component of learning and writing specifically; articulating what we have learned for ourselves is a key process in that learning” (7). By learning from the writing mistakes of my students, my skill increased in writing too, since I was more effectively able to practice what I was preaching to them. Additionally, in rereading my papers in an objective light, as well as being able to add to them in a way that is “conversational” also is a good tool to improve individual writing; without the ability to look critically at our own writing as an “outsider,” it is very easy to be blind to our own flaws, and even harder to accept that we have any to begin with, which is why accepting the objectivity of revision is so important to improving your own writing.

Peer Response and Reflection

peer-response

For the readings this week, I seemed to pick up on more of the ideas in the first one I read by Jaxon about approaches to guiding peer response. I feel as though I connected with the language of this article more because it shares many of the same ideas as my place of work… the writing center. I also found a great deal of myself in reading about the reasons student’s like peer responses in class. The characteristics of a peer response is basically what I do as a coach in the writing center, but being able to look at how someone else did a particular assignment was the main reason why I enjoyed peer response. There are some disadvantages in peer response because not every student always gives the most thoughtful and well developed responses to their peers even with prompts and pre-generated questions. Also, being able to really know the ins and outs of one’s own work and what one would like to see in terms of a response requires a great deal of reflection first and foremost on the writer’s part, which is something the student’s didn’t seem to make time for in the author of the article’s class.

 

As for the second article, I am not too sure why I couldn’t concentrate, but it was very hard for me to get into the reading. I didn’t really understand what I was reading most of the time. I began to connect with the reading a little more when Yancey introduced Donald Schon. I really liked the way he suggested that reflection is rhetorical because it is definitely true. In order to help others to understand and respond a certain way to one’s work, one has to know their own work. I enjoyed reading about his three types of reflection. The way that I understood each of them was as follows: reflection-in-action is like revising as one goes along. For example, if I were to be in the process of writing the paper, I would also be reflecting as I wrote and changing things as well. Constructive Reflection seems like one taking their own work and crafting it, but then setting time aside to actually engage in the revision process separately, which, to me, makes the process somewhat more objective. Reflection-in-presentation sounds like having one’s work in the presence of others and using that context to begin to reflect and explain what one’s work is and does. I am not too certain yet if I trust the notion that reflection-in-action works together and well with constructive reflection, but I will have to read the article over to make a more solid and evidence-backed statement.

Creating a New Environment 2016-09-26 17:42:00

Hope Wilson
9/26
Dr. Zamora
Eng 5020
Blog 1
                                              




                                                   Rhetoric and Composition;
                                Considering Peer to Peer Memo as a Guidance.

I am convinced that writing is more of a passion than a lesson learned. Assignments are completed as


 dictated but true writing comes from the comforts of one’s heart. The need to be a descriptive story


teller as a relaxing moment is appreciated is not taught or learned. To have the desire to write a


documentation without the promise of monetary proceeds is part of the gift of writing. To have the


courage to share your thoughts with other readers and writers without force or fear of judgement. The


processes of writing it down for public consumption is encouraged. Correctly used grammar and


punctuations bring the attention of the intellects and maintains public focus on the project.

Correctly written projects can be successful with peer’s response. To have someone review your


paper with the knowledge of the educator’s concerns can increases one’s chances of success.   Peer


review also guides the writer to consider thinking out side the box by offering suggestions of similar


possibilities. The educator may advise that ” the purpose of peer to peer memo is to guide the


responder to specific places in the essay that the writer is concerned about and also to give some idea


 of what the writer is trying to accomplish” as they consider the completion of their project.

Reflection is the state of mind. One’s intellect and life’s experiences reflect their response. Knowing


 ” insight doesn’t happen often on a click of the moment like a snap shot but comes in its own time


and more slowly and from nowhere but within” ones’ active subject at the time. When entering


college ” students understand the beneficiaries of twelve years’ worth of schooling” and will follow


the process of the educator to maintain their desired grade.  The different processes will be introduced


 to students and they will build on what is comfortable to them. A forced process may result in non


compliance. Some processes, if assigned consistently, may become standard in some educator’s work


plan. The consideration of other processes or curriculums that will engage the students and increase


achievement differently may not get introduced.