Category Archives: Student Blogs

"Bi, Butch, and Bar Dyke" and Peter Elbow’s "Voice in Writing"

Three women, three feminists, three professors of writing--with non-traditional sexual preferences, collectively represent several minorities. These very different individuals, with their own unique voices, all classify themselves as the “other” and believe that society has placed them in this category. I found the Bi, Butch, and the Bar Dyke all very interesting, opinionated women despite the article being somewhat dated. Luckily, many of their issues have moved forward to a better place of societal acceptance since this paper’s September 2000 publication.
The opening/introduction seemed intimidating, but the individual essays were quite reader-friendly (thankfully as I am often reading at the end of my brain capacity after a very long day). I feel that many of the issues were complicated by their personal concern—and defense of—their sexuality, and how it should or could affect their writing. Again, this may have been the social atmosphere—particularly within writing communities, as evidenced by student responses to these women “coming out” publicly to them. Much has changed in the spirit of acceptance in the last decade or so. 
The essay I thought would be the most challenging, Butch, had a rather fascinating perspective. My sister-in-law would identify with this category proudly and the chronological fit is a match as well. In retrospect, these opinions hold a lot of truth, and are historically accurate to the best of my recollection. The butch/ femme classification was explained simply as were the differences in identities. Mostly, I enjoyed her writing style—her voice—above the other two; perhaps because of the similarity to someone I knew.
The first author—Bi—was on point about the tendency of communal voices blurring the lines which individuals and/ or minorities believe differentiate them from the outsider. The reason? Because people are essentially the same; we are all human regardless of personal preferences. Societal labels should never restrict what comes from within.
“The tension, the uncertain space writing teacher and students find between the familiar ‘real me’ voice and an emerging public voice should not necessarily be resolved with codified positions; rather the tension should be a space to work from…” (Marinara, 72-73).
Bisexuality caused this woman many problems with identity and a political sense of self; one can only hope this friction created a solid base for her to educate students, motivate writing and become comfortable in her own identity. Which leads to the final essay, Bar Dyke, and her laundry list of major league personal problems. This woman had come a long way to overcome the difficulties she was handed, which made them part of her person—her voice. However, many of her choices were the result of a difficult past, but in no way related to her sexuality. Also, the dossier she submitted contained items—interesting to her—but inappropriate and unnecessary for an evaluation.
This paper was interesting and somewhat defined the place of "other" in writing as both writer and subject; mostly I enjoyed listening to the three different voices. On that note, Peter Elbow’s discussion of voice was, of course, amazing, informative, and fascinating. I enjoyed and agreed with his arguments for personal voice, reading aloud to hear one’s voice, and the practice of using voice to persuade as stated by both the sophists and one of my favorites, Aristotle. I also strongly agreed with his suggestions to: “…separate language and thinking from the author (especially if it’s famous or respected author) and to see multiple and even contrary interpretations of a text…” (182).
He had wonderful arguments for both listening to voice and writing objectively, thus avoiding recognition or the creation of bias. The struggle to accomplish both creates the tension—the conflict--- which makes writing alive—exciting as opposed to static and mediocre. Naturally I enjoyed his references to types of voice and style of reading; that is how theatre brings the words to life and puts them on their feet.  Overall, he states it simply when he says: “We don’t have to read or write the same way all the time” (183). 
Following Peter Elbow’s advice, I have been giving thought to our personal vignettes. I would like to create something that reflects our theme—the “aha” moment of writing while, at the same time, expresses the connection of English to its soul-mate--Theatre. Because as we grow, there are different moments of great achievement, I will try to create mini-scenes to capture these with both sensitivity and humor. That is all I have presently but I think I am on to something; let’s hope it blossoms as I move forward!
Lastly, the DigiWriMo sounds terrific, I’m getting excited about all of these hi-tech computer things---this is fun! But if I need help, hope you guys don’t mind!


Final Project: Thoughts

I like the Digital Writing Month idea. The site looks pretty cool, and I think our project would fit in nicely.

My contribution to the final project would be a personal narrative about the first time my writing was valued--at millions of dollars!  I never saw a penny of that cash, but neither did a CTC (chlortetracycline) factory in rural China. More on that in my story...

Weekly Response: "Bi, Butch and Bar Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender & Sexuality"


[T]his article examines the way three feminist, queer teachers of writing experience and perform their gender, class, and sexual identities. (70)
This reading seemed overly scholarly at first, and I had to look up expressivist and compositionist. Later, it became reflections of 3 lesbian professors and where they fit in their roles in academia.

Their personal stories were interesting as vignettes, but did not seem especially relevant to the teaching of writing or writing theory. These women offered insight into their personal experiences, but did not offer any information that was new. I am familiar with the gay and lesbian experience, albeit as an outsider, and this article, while perhaps informative to those with little prior knowledge, to me felt a bit outdated and stale. (Just checked, oh, it was published 15 years ago; that may be a factor.)

The first story tells of the professor struggling with her bi and working class identities in a traditional professional environment, and how her education and identity made it difficult for her to feel that she belongs anywhere. Her story could have been written from a "just lesbian" or "just working class" point of view, and it would have worked. In my opinion, her story was hackneyed.

The second author describes that everyone knows she's a lesbian because of her butch appearance. Also, she feels that this a more powerful position than straight female or lesbian female. Her story was the best of the three. I liked her voice and her story. I especially liked the part where a male colleague called her bossy, and how she didn't really address it or get ruffled by it. (Men bosses aren't called bossy; they are called powerful or in charge. Further, women who complain about being called bossy feed into the stereotype that not only is woman boss bossy, but she's whiney, sensitive, or emotional.) I found her story interesting and relevant.

The last story was about a lesbian professor seeking a promotion. She felt discriminated against for writing about her lesbian background on a job application.  As an employer, I was unhappy with her description of being aimless and lacking in motivation, getting degrees not because she was intellectually curious, seeking employment, or wishing to better herself, but simply because she had nothing better to do. Frankly, I wouldn't hire anyone with that attitude. And what does that really have to do with being a lesbian, anyway?
She said that references to work experience such as cocktail waitressing and admissions that both my existence before I started college and my college career were "aimless"
would make me seem to the provost and his peers as if I were not worthy of membership in the academic community.
While she whines about not being accepted and perceives it as an attack on her lesbianism and otherness, I feel she has completely misinterpreted the hesitance to promote her. Her focus should be less on her sexuality and more on her employability, and what she brings to the table versus other candidates with whom she may be competing. The cocktail waitress gig, in my opinion, is not what worried the administrators the most. When she was told she was supposed to be more like the upper level administrators, I don't think they were expecting her to turn White or grow a penis. I think they were looking for drive, motivation, and a sincere interest in making a contribution to the university as an individual classroom teacher and as a departmental team player. She showed that she was an excellent teacher, but lacked the other aforementioned skills (not traits!) that could render her the best choice for promotion. Her story, to me, was annoying and self indulgent.

Post-Post: One Additional Thought About Genre/Voice…..

My son, Justice (7th grade), asked me to read his Social Studies report this morning.  I was shocked by the amount of voice in his paper.  I pressed him to explain to me why it doesn’t sound “serious,” and repeatedly asked “What’s with all the jokes, Justice?”  I almost had him change the entire paper in favor of a more “academic sounding” piece, but I decided to let it stand.  I find that his tone and side notes actually make the information easier to retain and comprehend…..and kind of fun to read.  I imagine this type of writing to be in an informational book for kids, maybe not a report for school….we’ll see what his teacher thinks…..

I really liked Colin’s thoughts about there being a collective voice on the internet….I suspect that my son’s writing has been influenced by his immersion in pop culture (cartoons, video games, youtube videos, graphic novels, comic books, etc.).

THE OTTAWA, A NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBE
Research report by Justice Lopez

Oh, native americans. The people that ruled America (and parts of Canada) before the English came. Today, I am going to tell you all about the Ottawa tribe (Ah-ta-wa), which is one of the many, many,  (many) native american tribes that once existed or still exist today.  Seriously, why do native americans still exist? It’s 2015! I hope you enjoy this Mr. Herson.
The name of my tribe is Ottawa, as you already know. They are a northeast native american tribe, and their name means traders. Not traitors, traders. For example, the Ottawa’s would trade goods with other people to get goods in return.
The Ottawa tribe was always a small tribe. At the time they came in contact with others, like people from Europe, their population was only about 5,000. However, today, there are over 15,000 in the Ottawa tribe. Wait, really? 15,000? Why do native americans still exist!?
The Ottawa people spoke a language called Ojibwe, which is a complicated language and is in the Algonquian language group. Here are some words for practice: aaniin is pronounced “ah-neen,” and is a friendly greeting. Miigwech is pronounced “Mee-Gwech,” and means thank you. Pronouncing those words is as difficult as teaching a fish to walk on land.
Women in the Ottawa tribe used to be farmers, cook, and take care of their children while men did most of the hunting and occasionally went to war to save their families. Men and women both told stories, such as fairy tales and Ottawa legends. The men were the only people who could become chiefs at the time, but today Ottawa women could become a chief too. I would not want to live in the time as the Ottawas, there was no internet service back then!
The Ottawa people believed in spirits and gods, and presented gifts to the gods often. The tribe had traditions as well. Ottawa’s believed in many different gods, and they also held special ceremonies at specific months. For example, the Ottawa people had a religious ceremony every spring and summer referred to as “the feast of the dead” where women would prepare the bodies of the people that have died, and men dug holes for the bodies. After the ceremony, nobody ever spoke about them again.
There was no one place where all the Ottawa native americans lived, because they were spread apart. From Oklahoma to Ontario, to Ohio to Michigan, Ottawa's lived everywhere. Watch out, they’re coming for you next!
For the full history of the Ottawa clan, it is too large to describe right now. That’s like asking me to try to explain everything I did in my whole life in a couple of sentences. Please don’t make me do that. Long story short, through the 1600’s until now the Ottawa’s encountered people like the French, and fought in battles.   
Now, I’ve mostly covered everything there is today about my Ottawa friends, but there is some more fun facts!
Did you know, that there is a city named Ottawa, and it is Canada’s southeastern capitol? And the Ottawa tribe actually has something to do with the name of the city!

That’s all for today folks, so thanks for reading! Now, go outside and impress your friends with all the knowledge you just learned. You can stop reading this paper now.

Elbow and Gibson/Marinara/Meem

Bi, Butch and Bar Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender and Sexuality

This article explores stereotypes relative to sexual orientation, gender and social class present in modern academia, as experienced through the eyes of three female writing professors.  
Honestly, it took me quite a while to get through reading the first of the three “papers” within this article.  While I appreciated her experience, I kept having this nagging feeling that her writing style did not do her story justice. I felt her overly-complicated sentence structure and word choices clouded the heart of her plight.  It was uncomfortable and almost felt like she wanted it to be that way. However, the experience she shared about going  back to her former place of employment did begin to trigger some notions in me that became fully realized by the end of the third article (to be discussed).  
The second narrative was easier to digest and was clear in its conclusions: the author’s experiences as a butch lesbian with kids has afforded her certain privileges and powers not readily available to femme lesbians (as demonstrated by her three anecdotes). It was an interesting observation and provided some food for thought.  
The third author’s story really struck a chord in me and had me thinking about my own persona in the classroom.  I had always consciously known I was doing something with my students each year-something I felt would somehow benefit them, or me, or us, as a group, but I was never able to articulate it until I read this article. Just as the author had chosen to connect with her students based on her past experiences with a working class upbringing, a survivor of family violence and a recovering mental patient, I, too, have used my past experiences in order to create a commonality between myself and the students.  Although my experiences differ from those of the author, I often find myself sharing stories of my youth (and those of my husband’s unthinkable childhood) to my students in an effort to make myself relatable in the eyes of my students. A large majority of my students are Hispanic or African-American and 85% of my school is eligible for reduced-lunch.  I stand in front of my students year after year- the-white-middle-class-teacher-with-the-spanish-last-name - and strive to make myself accessible to them.  Information about my students’ backgrounds are revealed to me that tear me to pieces. One student has a mother that’s been in jail her entire life and a father she’s never met.  After reading this article, I realized that my “performance” is one of having a somewhat troubled youth.  Although these stories are not untrue, I doubt that I would highlight them to a classroom with a majority of upper-class white students-not to say that they are immune to struggles-but the stories I’d share would be different ones, or painted in a slightly different light.  I, like the author in the article who used her identity as “currency” with her administrators, I use my experience to “purchase power” with my students.  I think this may be the reason so many of them open-up to me.  I believe my classroom environment is one of trust and mutual-respect because of this.  

Reconsiderations:  Voice in Writing Again:  Embracing Contraries

I looooove Peter Elbow!!!! There, I said it.  LOL!!!  (can you hear my voice?)

I suspect that Elbow’s voice is the reason why I enjoyed his article more than the author of the first section in the previously-mentioned article.  Seriously, though, he wrote an entire paper arguing both sides of a viewpoint- something I feel like I spend my entire life doing- and he makes it seems so effortless.  So, I guess I am free to say I agree with him.  I think most things in life are a that way- both sides are usually “right.”  
I think I Shakespeare was alive today, he would be a screenwriter and director.  What would we study in school then?  All this discussion about voice got me to thinking about the future of writing and technology (which is why I’m excited about my discussion lead night on multi-modal).   
I also wonder about how gender relates to voice, as Elbow pointed out.  When we know something was written by a man, do we interpret those words differently than when we think it is a woman?  Yes, I suspect.  This idea can go even further when we know the author, personally, that wrote something (which is why I try not to look at the names on my students’ papers before i read them).
Voice is complicated as it pertains to genre.  I’m sure most will agree that voice is particularly important when it comes to narrative pieces, but what about in other genres.  At first, I was thinking that it does not belong in, say, a formal complaint letter.  But then, I got to thinking that the elimination of your authentic voice is, in fact, a “voice.”  A voice that is unapologetically no-nonsense and, therefore, also essential.
Elbow’s conclusion about both ignoring and paying acute attention to voice in writing reminded me of something I do in the classroom with my students.  We read like readers (to enjoy) and read like writers (to learn).  When we read like readers, we gobble up the words, eat them up and bask in the fullness we experience from having read the piece.  When we re-read as writers, we perform an autopsy on the pages, dissecting each phrase and word and punctuation mark trying to discover how and why the author chose to put them together.  This, I think, are the lenses he was talking about.

Final Project/DigiWriMo

I am glad we came up with a concept for our final project.  I am thinking that my “vignette” will include a little of what we discussed in class regarding gathering other people’s experiences with writing.  I am still fascinated with the idea and got some confirmation when I informally asked a few people how they learned to write.  The range of answers was fascinating.  So, as a part of my project, I would like to include these snippets for all to hear, in their actual “voices.”  I hope to be able to include a mini audio-archive of some of these voices, perhaps with some images floating around…..not quite sure yet, but to hear an actual voice rather than reading their ideas I think would be interesting.  I will add my own written section, as well, about my own experience and who knows????......
I checked out and subscribed to the DigiWriMo website. I think we can do some good things there, especially since its connected to the publication we hope to get our final project on. 

"Voice in Writing Again" by Peter Elbow

     I never really thought about the use of voice in writing until reading Peter Elbow's "Voice in Writing Again". I don't know if I was explicitly taught this or if it is subconsciously done, but I always assumed that if I was writing an academic paper then my voice would have to be as dry and boring as all the rest. The only time I could inject my personality into the writing was when it was a creative piece. To be completely honest, I still feel weird that my blog posts aren't very formal and proper.

     There are people in this world who could read an anonymous piece of writing and then pinpoint the author. I am not one of those people. Whether this is mainly due to voice or unique style, I don't know; but I can't do it. I know the quality of writing some of my students are capable of, but I couldn't tell you who wrote what.

     This year, like most, I notice a change in quality when we move from the creative writing portion of the class to the persuasive. Consider the following beginning to a student's narrative:

          "Buzzbuzzbuzz. Eve was startled by the incessant vibrations of the phone beside her ear.  
She whined before grabbing her phone and unlocking it furiously. Her best friend, Karina, was 
spamming Eve with multiple texts."

I love the language and personality this student incorporates into the story. Unfortunately, this same student, when given a persuasive task this past week, left the class without writing anything down. It wasn't for lack of trying, she just couldn't find the right way to begin. She couldn't find a way to include her voice in what she thought was supposed to be a dry paper.

  I frequent Reddit, a community site on which the users submit content of all varieties. I particularly enjoy reading the comments on most posts, mainly because they are all so comical. By now, I've read comments from thousands of different users, but they all read as though they came from the same mind. It seems to me that the Internet has established its own collective voice, with thousands, perhaps millions, of unique contributors falling in with one another.

I am excited by the new idea for the group project, mainly because it gives more freedom to everyone to be themselves. each piece would be extremely personal, featuring everyone's own voice. In terms of the Digital Writing Month, I'm also excited by the possibilities this might present. I've never really created anything outside of normal assignments. This blog is the most advanced thing I've even attempted.

Weekly Response: Peter Elbow’s "Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries"

I'm going to write this weekly response differently from the others and see how I like it. It will be more of a reflection after reading than a note-taking and response.

This week's reading by Peter Elbow talks about voice, obviously. I know the term but didn't know there was so much controversy surrounding it. Well of course you can hear voice in writing, but tuning it out is important, too. I enjoyed how he argued first for and then against teaching and reading voice. Neat how he proved the importance and validity of both sides. That's certainly an uncommon way to write a persuasive essay.


Support for Elbow's arguments were presented logically, and as always, I seem to agree with everything this guy says.  And then when I step back from it, there's a problem. Last time it was how to put his ideas into practice without being met with violence. This time it's wondering why we are splitting hairs on this issue. Of course there's voice, and of course you can read a text and omit the voice. Are people really arguing hotly about this? I'm going to have to read this again tomorrow, because I'm sort of baffled at the need for controversy over this.

Speaking of reading twice, the only part I'm not sure I agreed with is the reading twice thing. (Elbow didn't say it though, some guy named Lanham did.) While that might be the best way to understand a text, I'm sure I would read once and use Lanham's practice called oscillatio instead of trying to read everything twice. (The term oscillatio is bothersome because it is a noun. Lanham should have named his practice with a verb. Or not, yoga is a practice. Anyway the term irks me and sounds wrong.)

I like his bit about not needing to be a zero-sum game. I think this is a perfect example of both sides being right and having value. There are many more arguments like this. I wish I could have put it in those terms for my discussion lead: that multiple literacies/languages and learning SWE are not mutually exclusive; it's not a zero-sum game where one is right and the other wrong. Thanks for those terms, Elbow. I knew that's what I meant, but again you explained things more eloquently than I.

Elbow states that just because there's voice in writing, it doesn't mean the voice reflects the author's authentic personality. That's good, because I like Elbow's voice in writing, but if he's like that in person he's probably a long-haired, Birkenstock wearing, granola eating, kumbaya singing dude. Now that I said that, I'm going to google him....

OK, Elbow was right; his voice probably isn't really reflecting himself, just that he's a product of the 60's and 70's. He went to school at Harvard and Brandeis, and taught at MIT after turning down UC Berkeley. If he taught English at MIT over Berkeley, then that right there proves the truth of the argument that voice does not really represent the author but is always constructed. If his voice, at least how I "hear" it, were really a reflection of his person, he would not have chosen MIT over Berkeley.

blog 3

Thoughts on "Grammar, Grammars, and the Teachings of Grammar" plus what I want to contribute to the group project.


                                                            _____________


“students will only learn what we teach/ only learn because we teach’ Very interesting intro. I like challenging the assumption that students don’t learn anywhere besides a classroom with guidelines, when it is generally the opposite.

“perverse beliefs” as if humanizing students, de-glorifying “tired and true” (antiquated) teaching styles, and suggesting teachers stand of the ground instead of pedestals (soapboxes) is so radical.
“nor on their ability to avoid error”

So many things wrong in one paragraph. I disagree with the proposed definition of grammar. Especially specifying the “native” nature of language. Grammar is supposed to be the rules that make language technically correct and structured. And suggesting a heavy focus on just grammar is appalling. It is the content of a message that matters, not its delivery. A sentence can violate every grammatical rule, but can still be understandable. And why would anyone suggest grammar-centric lessons when grammar doesn’t even teach people how to write? (Ironically.)

“seems designed to perpetuate…the issue” funny, since we’re all still arguing over grammar.
“improved neither writing quality nor control…” I kind of like to see results that prove grammar lessons fail. Then maybe we could stop acting like “correctness” is the absolute most important thing.
“does no harm” thinking that drilling grammar into students does no harm is laughable. Not only did grammar-based lessons not help students improve, but it also damaged their opinion of the subject. V frustrating.

“conclusion can be…ignored” seriously. I was wondering how so many people could read the same study and have such opinions (does no harm!) but clearly, ignoring the results that contradict what you believe is the only plausible explanation for such opinions.

Good questions she proposes, but questions 2 and 3 seem kind of boring/redundant/unnecessary. 1 and 4 are really interesting in that they aren’t as concrete and more abstract. I think answering questions that have no “correct” answer are more likely to lead to learning/ gaining insight. Looking forward to what she says about 1 and 4.

“rigidly sequential” again with the “formula” of writing a good paper.

Francis had some good points, despite having written them in 1954. Amazing how the conversation hasn’t changed much in 61 years.

“stylistic grammar” nice. I like the breaking down of grammars. It seems way more practical this way.

“the four young French girls” shows how grammar is innate, in a way, and knowing every grammar rule is not necessary to be able to use it. I disagree with calling it “autonomous”.

The discussion of proper plural endings displays the link between literacy and writing skills, which we discussed in our second week of class. It makes me think that knowing proper grammar is more of a modeling thing than a learning thing. (We recreate words based on how we’ve seen other words.) This is kind of reinforced by the opening paragraph of “College English.”

 Learning grammar before learning to write/ learning to use utensils before being allowed to eat is an interesting comparison.

I disagree that Seliger’s experiment complicated the issue further. I think it measures (subconscious?) retention of grammatical rules. (Especially for ESL speakers; just because they can recite the rule, doesn’t mean they choose to use it. They may be speaking English, but their linguistic roots are still in their first language, and they probably rely on those grammar rules more than their new English-based ones.)  I know people who are fiercely intelligent—smarter than me for sure—and yet they constantly violate grammatical rules. One friend often says “I seen” as in “I seen the craziest thing yesterday,” as opposed to “I saw.” (Side note, he’s not the only one I’ve heard do this). But he is still one of the smartest people I know. Similar to the violation of the “your/you’re” rule. Just because someone breaks it, doesn’t automatically make them less intelligent (no matter how much it aggravates the rest of us).   

“clear only if known” summarizes the English language as a whole perfectly. The thing we all love most is someone else’s worst nightmare.

“unconnected with anything remotely resembling literate adult behavior” amazing. It’s the theory of “here are the rules, and why you can break them” thing we discussed un class again.
“worship of formal grammar study” laughed harder than I should have at this.

“accessing knowledge…learners have already internalized” this sounds better than when I said “innate ability” earlier. This is what I was trying to say.

“there are not four errors” that was unnecessary. Grammar is hard enough without throwing in trick questions like that.

“spoken dialect are…irrelevant to mastering print literacy” I disagree with that.

“skills at two levels” yes this is good. It’s not to say that grammar isn’t important at all, because it does matter. But the extent to which education stresses grammar is out of control. This is a much better approach/suggestion— work on conveying the meaning and do so in a way that is technically correct. Good, happy medium. Also, “active involvement” is a much better way to learn something; the expression “experience is the best teacher” doesn’t exist for no reason!

“constrained to reinvent the wheel” that’s probably very apparent when you look at today’s curriculums.

“guide our teaching” not dictate.

Overall thoughts: good essay, interesting sources and studies, and kind of what formalized what I already thought about grammar (probably what we all think of grammar).


As far as what I’d like to contribute to the final project, all I can say, really, is that I want to contribute my absolute best. It’s hard for me to say what, exactly, I want to contribute, because we haven’t decided on what we’re doing yet. I felt a lot of people leaning towards Idea #2 at the end of Monday’s session, and it concerns me a bit. I’m not a teacher, so I’ve never created a lesson plan or a syllabus or anything like that before, and I feel a bit out of touch with the curriculum aspect altogether (we all know that Catholic schools vary greatly from public schools in this regard). And when it comes to executive decisions, I am not the girl to go to; the thought of having to (possibly?) create my own lesson plan is concerning, since I feel I’m not nearly as good at generating completely new ideas as I am at revising existing ideas. Also, I’m awful at pop culture. Whenever someone says “pop culture,” my mind just says: ????????? I’m sure whatever we decide, I will figure it out, but as of now, I don’t have much to share aside from my reservations. I’m sorry if this isn’t helpful/ didn’t answer the question. I’m looking forward to discussing this more on Monday with you guys though.

Ideas for Final Project

For our final project, I think that the anti-theory idea has some potential. It we elaborate more on ways to expand that idea we could create something really different. What I was not in love with about that idea was the brainstorming we came up with in class. After thinking about it, I thought that we came up with a useful list of genres (narrative, persuasive, expository, poetry etc…) yet it is the same old we’ve been taught for years. These genres are important --- don’t get me wrong, but if we go with that we won’t be creating something different.

Idea #2 is good too but I am not sure that creating lesson plans will satisfy all members of our class. As a writer, I’ll be interested in being part of this project but I won’t feel like I’m truly doing something that connects with me.

Being that idea #3 still needs to be discussed further --- I’ll leave it at that and maybe we can talk more about it in class tonight.

Thinking about something different for this project that I could connect with I thought about creating a book for writers. It could be a section of the original handbook for writers that we talked about or a new one. A book where I would write reflective pieces or prompts, or both… one where I would write about my own experiences as a writer, what I’ve learn… something that can help and inspire younger writers to continue going. Perhaps some of the topics we’ve talked about in class like the comments teachers make on students papers or the importance of grammar could be incorporated in this books. Perhaps this idea can blend with Laura’s idea about the “collaborative narrative story/book”… not sure but it sounds exciting and DIFFERENT.


Looking forward to discussing more of this tonight in class J