Uh oh... someone please define formulaic writing for me, please? Is IEW formulaic?

[Robin in Tx]

The thread below about Bauer is brilliant (I agree, btw!) brought up criticism of formulaic writing. Then someone said something that indicated that IEW taught formulaic writing.

 

Eek... I was looking at that for next year (with 13yo dd).

 

So, in a nutshell, can you guys name the writing programs that are formulaic and the ones that are not?

[Linda in NM]

E gads--yes, it is. I use it (have used it for two years) with my 13 yos...and he's made great strides in his style. Formulaic writing (I'm speaking with my communications professor hat on here) is not necessarily "bad"--it gives most students a structure and the rudiments of style, which they can then refine and "make their own." If I had just 10% of my graduate students capable of writing as well as my son can, I'd be happy.

 

Depends on what your expectations are...if your student loves creative writing, formulaic might be less effective...if your student writes because writing is an essential skill he or she must have, formulaic should provide the foundation he or she will need to communicate clearly and effectively...

 

Just my 2 cents...

[Love2Learn]

IEW teaches structure and style. I am currently using this program with both my 4th and 7th graders. My 7th grader is a talented, creative writer who carries her notebook with her everywhere she goes -- just in case she has a free moment to write :001_huh:.

 

She was writing well before we started her with IEW, but IEW has been a great fit for her. This program has helped her most with "reigning in" her thoughts and organizing her ideas on paper. It has also been excellent for teaching how to make key word outlines, develop summaries from facts, and write research papers.

 

By nature, I am a mathy, logical person - so I LOVE formulas :001_smile:. The approach to writing taught by IEW makes so much sense to me. But I look at it more as a toolbox. The concepts taught by IEW equip the student with the materials needed to write well. We only require that the formulas be employed when doing an IEW assignment. For all other writing assignments (papers written for other subjects or journaling), these tools can be employed in whatever manner necessary to get the job done.

 

Hope this helps!

[kathleen]

Certainly Jensen's essay writing program (Format Writing) is formulaic, and IEW is to a certain extent, especially in its beginning stages. Anything that tells a student to have, say, an introduction that includes three reasons backing up his thesis (which has to be the last sentence in the introduction), followed by three paragraphs matching the three reasons, followed by a conclusion that sums up and restates the thesis is formulaic!

 

Most early programs for writing, however, are formulaic by necessity. I happen to disagree with Mr. Stobaugh if indeed he said that this type of writing is marked down on the SAT. I know many kids who have used the standard 5-paragraph essay format and received very good scores on the SAT essay.

 

I also think some structure to academic writing is necessary, but it doesn't have to be the standard 5-para thing I described in my first paragraph. That gets boring fast! But as a tool for reluctant or beginning writers, it is very hepful!

[HollyinNNV]

E gads--yes, it is. I use it (have used it for two years) with my 13 yos...and he's made great strides in his style. Formulaic writing (I'm speaking with my communications professor hat on here) is not necessarily "bad"--it gives most students a structure and the rudiments of style, which they can then refine and "make their own." If I had just 10% of my graduate students capable of writing as well as my son can, I'd be happy.

 

Depends on what your expectations are...if your student loves creative writing, formulaic might be less effective...if your student writes because writing is an essential skill he or she must have, formulaic should provide the foundation he or she will need to communicate clearly and effectively...

 

Just my 2 cents...

 

I would compare it to music. I'll even narrow it down to my own instrument, violin. Much of what we do is learn how to play music in a certain style-you could call it an established musical formula. Then, as you become better, you can branch out with your own musical touches. But, the branching out only goes so far, really. For example, I'm studying a Brahms sonata. I've listened to Itzak Perlman and Anne Sophie Mutter play it. Honestly, they give a very similar performance in many ways. (Brahms writes in much of what he wants.) Now as a student, if I can learn and emulate Mutter, Perlman and my violin teacher, I am very, very happy. Am I following a formula? Sure.

 

But, you say, surely the IEW formula is not comparable to Perlman! And you would be right. However, IEW and classical writing programs do require students to emulate writing. They use different methods. They both get good results if used with a sensitive instructor, one able to mold the program to the student's needs. In other words, I think IEW, as any program, is better used organically rather than in a static method.

 

I guess my point is that formulas aren't necessarily bad.

Holly

[angela in ohio]

We use IEW. Of course, you start out teaching by formula. What the graders are probably looking for is whether a student has moved *beyond* the formula. But, like art or music, as already mentioned, you start with the formula and then develop your own style from there.

[Laurie4b]

I'd be hard put to come up with any skill--academic, atheletic, artistic, etc. that does not START with structure (ie that is not "formulaic"). Skipping the formulaic stage results in chaos, not creativy or innovation. We don't encourage our students to form the letters of the alphabet any old way--we teach them a specific way, and expect that later they will deviate. In athletics, you practice the basics over and over. That's formulaic. Any good art class starts with structure and students work within the structure to produce their art. (Follow the development of Picasso, for instance. His drawings started out "realistic." As he develops, he begins to deviate and the innovations are acknowledged as genius. ) Once you get really good at the structure, you may find "out of the box" ways to deviate that are brilliant. This is as true for writing as any other pursuit.

 

As for IEW, I think the structure part of the program is excellent and will lend itself to development. I am skeptical that the stylistic part is helpful. My intuitive sense is that it is better used much more selectively than recommended by IEW.

[Beth in SW WA]

I am skeptical that the stylistic part is helpful. My intuitive sense is that it is better used much more selectively than recommended by IEW.

 

My kids' writing tutor scolded them for using some IEW stylistic elements (because clause and who/which). Now I'm really confused.

[kathleen]

Yes! I agree about being skeptical about the "style" part of IEW (or WriteShop for that matter). It's embarrassingly easy to spot IEW papers because of the call for "ly" words, etc. Even in my son's Torrey class last year I could spot the sentence openers of those students who had used IEW over the years! These were high schoolers, too.

 

A better idea, in my opinion, is learning good organization for a paper, and then doing some practice on good sentence writing (for variation) with something like the Sentence Composing series or The Art of Styling Sentences. OR, another option is to use something like Classical Writing from the beginning. Imitation and analysis of really good writing is the best teacher!

[LilyK]

How old are your kids with the writing tutor. For my kids who are Jr. High and older, I make them stop using the because, who/which clause.

 

For example, instead of "Hector, who was the defender of the city..."

I make them write "Hector, defender of the city..." It is much more sohisticated and concise.

 

I think the overuse of those clauses in IEW make for clunky, awkward writing.

[Beth in SW WA]

How old are your kids with the writing tutor. For my kids who are Jr. High and older, I make them stop using the because, who/which clause.

 

 

It was dd 10 who was scolded by her tutor, who gave the same reasons you and Kathleen gave.

 

I wonder what the SAT graders think of the "openers" :)

[Robin in Tx]

It's embarrassingly easy to spot IEW papers because of the call for "ly" words, etc. Even in my son's Torrey class last year I could spot the sentence openers of those students who had used IEW over the years!

 

I have heard this before, especially from an on-line writing tutor.

 

Eek. Thanks for the alternate suggestions.

[Nan in Mass]

He's an engineer, but what he actually physically does all day is write documents and design systems for managing those documents (more interesting than it sounds). Know how he does it? Using the formula for a 5 paragraph paper that he was taught by his high school expository writing teacher. It was a half year course. He can write and none of the other engineers can. I agree that it all depends what you want. For technical writing, a formula will get you far GRIN.

-Nan

[HollyinNNV]

How old are your kids with the writing tutor. For my kids who are Jr. High and older, I make them stop using the because, who/which clause.

 

For example, instead of "Hector, who was the defender of the city..."

I make them write "Hector, defender of the city..." It is much more sohisticated and concise.

 

I think the overuse of those clauses in IEW make for clunky, awkward writing.

 

In IEW, the who/which clause does disappear and is called the invisible who/which. In your example above, the "who" is there, but is invisible. Mr. Pudewa thinks it is easier to teach the who/which for a while, then take it out. Instead of trying to teach students to write in the "invisible" who/which first.

 

I find that my students begin to take out the who/which pretty naturally around jr. hi.

 

However, the "because clause" bothers me to read and write. I guess a lot of it is a matter of preference.:D

Holly

[Robin in Tx]

This has been a very helpful thread. I can see both sides... I think that the formulaic writing that some of you are in favor of is really about structure, whereas the formulaic writing that some are criticizing is about style. So it seems that formulaic structure can be a good thing in many situations, but a stilted formulaic style stands out like a sore thumb. Or at least that's what I'm gathering from the opinions here.

 

Thanks for the clarifications and suggestions. I am now totally freaked out because I am more certain than ever before that I don't have a clue what I'm doing :). But at least now I realize my ignorance, whereas I was previously ignorant about it. THat's step one, right?

 

Thanks again!

[HollyinNNV]

This has been a very helpful thread. I can see both sides... I think that the formulaic writing that some of you are in favor of is really about structure, whereas the formulaic writing that some are criticizing is about style. So it seems that formulaic structure can be a good thing in many situations, but a stilted formulaic style stands out like a sore thumb. Or at least that's what I'm gathering from the opinions here.

 

Thanks for the clarifications and suggestions. I am now totally freaked out because I am more certain than ever before that I don't have a clue what I'm doing :). But at least now I realize my ignorance, whereas I was previously ignorant about it. THat's step one, right?

 

Thanks again!

 

OK-I am going to clarify my opinion. I do use the IEW style guidelines. And you are right, a stilted formulaic style is rotten to read. However, I do make my students practice all of the guidelines until they are easy. Then I either substitute other stylistic elements to practice or leave my students to their own devices. Everything in moderation, right?

 

The problem with the stylistic guidelines is when you think, "If I include an "ly" sentence opener in each paragraph, my writing is good."

 

My ds's example from last week (he's 8).

Funly, Indiana Jones went to the temple.

Bad-not a real word.

 

Incredibly, her mom drove into the driveway.

Bad-it is not incredible!

 

Commonly, the turtle is considered a quick animal.

Bad-not true!

 

Disjointedly, her bow bumped across the cello string like a jackrabbit in the desert.

Good-no problem.

 

But, to get to the good example, we have to guide students. We have to model good writing. Students have to read good writing. Moms need to admire the good sentences and explain why they were good. And students usually have to write many not-so-good sentences to get to the place where they write great sentences.

 

My point is that there is more to it than just practicing it. That's the part of writing instruction that is organic. It flows out of the needs that the student shows, rather than just following the IEW steps.

 

I know that there are many people who take the structure part of IEW and use it without the style. I wanted to give a brief picture of how I use the style section.

Holly:001_smile:

[FloridaLisa]

Yes! I agree about being skeptical about the "style" part of IEW (or WriteShop for that matter). It's embarrassingly easy to spot IEW papers because of the call for "ly" words, etc. Even in my son's Torrey class last year I could spot the sentence openers of those students who had used IEW over the years! These were high schoolers, too.

 

 

Unfortunately, that's what I fear with IEW! That kids, using it year after year, will absorb the check-list style and fail to break out from the mold. Despite my skepticism, we used IEW for the first time this year. It was a bit of an experiment for (or on) my kids. ;) In the long run, I hope that this one-year foray into IEW will enrich their writing. I *think* that's what happened for two of my dc, extensive readers, who already had some rhythm and style to their writing. It remains to be seen whether another dc will have to unlearn some of the helpful tricks and rules.

 

Lisa

[Linda in NM]

I love it--did you know that Andrew Pudewa was (is?) a Suzuki violin teacher? My son plays classical viola...

[Linda in NM]

OMG--an engineer who can WRITE? I used to write documentation for engineers--I've been being paid to write for most of my adult life...and I was sought after because I could understand what engineers meant and translate their work into written English that others could understand....;->

[Nan in Mass]

As you can imagine, my husband was absolutely adamant that I bang that 5 para formula into our children.

[NCMom]

I resisted it fiercely for many years because I was afraid of formulaic writing.

 

What changed my mind was that I realized that after all of the co-op classes I had taught the only time I saw problems/formulaic writing was with users of another program! Definitely not the experience of the other poster and not what I have heard elsewhere, so ymmv. The fact that we just weren't up to par in writing and something had to give made the choice easier too. (Better formulaic than nothing??:)

 

This year my middle dd had a co-op class where 4 out of 6 kids used IEW in some form. They had to do 2 written reports each and I only saw a couple of who/which clauses, lol. So maybe it's all about how you use it?

 

I have three different levels using it and in no way do their efforts look the same. I think that the formulaic part gets them going and then fades away slowly as they develop more of a sense of style. At this point just getting them writing well and on their own makes me ecstatic. My oldest is going to use the new Rhetoric offering this summer - he keeps begging me to hurry up and to order it.

 

hth,

Georgia

[HollyinNNV]

I love it--did you know that Andrew Pudewa was (is?) a Suzuki violin teacher? My son plays classical viola...

 

Yes, I knew that about Andrew. I'm not sure if he still teaches or even plays.

 

My degree is in viola perf. and music ed. I play violin now because of shoulder pain. Dh plays viola too. His undergrad scholarship was through music. Viola is a great scholarship instrument! Good luck to your son!

Holly:001_smile:

[Jan P.]

Kathleen,

 

I was given the IEW Structure and Style, but I still can't get myself geared up to teach this way. My youngest actually took a class with IEW's MIddle Ages History program, but she didn't like it at all. I'm going back to the progymnasmata and find those composing books you mentioned.

[Robin in Tx]

I was given the IEW Structure and Style, but I still can't get myself geared up to teach this way. My youngest actually took a class with IEW's MIddle Ages History program, but she didn't like it at all. I'm going back to the progymnasmata and find those composing books you mentioned.

 

Jan, have you seen Jean in Wisc.'s posts about the sentence composing books? If not, I can try to find the one on this board... its about her son using them. Very encouraging. I'm definitely adding those to our studies next year, regardless of what else we do!

 

Ro bin

[Robin in Tx]

For anyone who is interested, here is the link to Jean's post a while back about the sentence composing books:

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16258&highlight=sentence+composing

[Guest SheltonClan]

Can't resist throwing my two cents in on this one. Both of my older kids have completed their freshman comp class at college (both at age 16, both when high school juniors) after years of IEW. I am so sold on that program! Anyway, my daughter and my son each had different professors, but both professors warned the students that "formulaic" writing would be graded down, and not to EVER just turn in a five-paragraph essay and expect a good grade. Can I tell you that both my daughter and my son used their IEW techniques throughout the class and each received an "A" in the course?

 

IEW techniques are just good writing skills. Sentence openers? That's called varying your sentence structure. Dress ups? Those are good descriptive skills as well as addressing passive verb structure. Don't worry! YES, while the student is younger, the writing may seem awkward. But, as they gain skill and maturity (and as they learn to advance their dress-ups) the "techniques" become invisible. Beth (comment above) has basically taught her children the "invisible who/which" - that is just an advancement of the who/which that the younger students are taught!

[Ms. Riding Hood]

I happen to disagree with Mr. Stobaugh if indeed he said that this type of writing is marked down on the SAT. I know many kids who have used the standard 5-paragraph essay format and received very good scores on the SAT essay.

 

I don't know any scores from other kids' writing, but I would think that if a kid can write a solid essay using ANY format, that piece of writing would receive good marks on the SAT. It doesn't take long to tire of reading bad writing, and those readers must LONG for something good to come past their eyes--five paragraph or otherwise. I suspect they want to reward anybody who can communicate effectively!

 

You've gotten lots of great feedback on IEW. It's been a great tool for us, and as many have mentioned, it served as a starting point--not necessarily the be-all/end-all.

[Ms. Riding Hood]

I would compare it to music. I'll even narrow it down to my own instrument, violin.

 

Ds just walked by and looked over my shoulder. He said, "Hey--tenor cleff." (He's a former bassoonist.) I'm glad he explained it to me; I was clueless. I thought it was a fancy letter "B" or something. Glad I'm not the teacher! :D

[Beth in SW WA]

Can I tell you that both my daughter and my son used their IEW techniques throughout the class and each received an "A" in the course?

 

Cara,

First off, welcome to the hive :)

 

You must be proud of your kiddos getting A's is college. That's got to make a homeschool mom feel awesome!

 

Did you start w/ the TWSS when your kids were younger and move through all of the IEW components?

[Storm Bay]

Disjointedly, her bow bumped across the cello string like a jackrabbit in the desert.

Good-no problem.

Holly:001_smile:

 

Excellent points, but I do want to mention that while some style is just plain poor, sometimes what people call good style is also related to opinion! I would want to move that disjointedly or drop it;):D, even if it's not bad writing. At any rate, this thread has been very interesting!