non-formulaic writing

[lewelma]

I would like to open a discussion on non-formulaic writing. The hive always has so much to say. :001_smile:

 

I started thinking about this issue a couple of days ago after receiving my ds's paper on the Messenger space probe. We were reviewing all the different kinds of writing that he has learned over the past few years before we began something new. To give you some back ground, we used IEW for 2 years and focused mostly on summarizing novels and writing expository essays with the 5 paragraph model. Then, we spent a year using MCT's paragraph town which reinforced the 5 paragraph model. And this past year we used WWS which focused on scientific and historical narratives and descriptions and light-weight literary analysis and research skills.

 

So I asked him to write an expository essay on something from Scientific American, and he chose the article on the Messenger space probe. He asked me how long it should be, and I told him as long as it took to say what he wanted to say. I did not want to guide him at all (which I told him) because I wanted to see what he could do with an open ended assignment (he had NEVER done one before). Writing is not his strong suit and I have felt like I have pulled my hair out for years trying to push him along and get him writing at grade level.

 

Well, I guess in the back of my mind I expected a 5 paragraph essay with the standard intro, 3 body paragraphs, and conclusions. Needless to say I was SHOCKED to see what he produced, because it did not resemble what we had studied with IEW or MCT or what I had done way back when I was in school. It looked suspiciously like WWS, but not even that. Put quite plainly, it was not formulaic.

 

So here it is. Obviously not perfect, but it is his work. I don't want to really discuss this particular piece of writing, but use it as a jumping off point for the more general questions below. DS is 11, almost 12.

 

 

 

Mercury is one of the least known planets. Its heat and distance to the sun makes it nearly impossible to reach. In fact, Mercury is harder energy wise to reach than Jupiter, which is why the first space probe to ever land on Mercury, MESSENGER, only arrived in 2011. Orbiting Mercury is especially hard because at the distance Mercury is from the sun, the sun's gravitational field is stronger then the planet's own. Thus, a space probe attempting to enter orbit around Mercury at a normal speed would orbit the sun instead. MESSENGER solved this problem by spending six and a half years doing flybys around every inner-planet other than Mars. Each flyby slowed MESSENGER down so by the end of the sixth year and the second flyby around Mercury, MESSENGER was slow enough that its engine could do the rest.

 

MESSENGER itself also needed to be prepared for its stay on Mercury. To protect its sensitive instruments from overheating at temperatures high enough to melt zinc, MESSENGER hid behind a sunshade. Although the solar panels had to stick out from behind the sunshade, they were held at a steep angle so as not to absorb too much sunlight. Because the camera also had to extend beyond the sunshade, it could easily overheat and had to be protected. The solution was to place the camera on forty grams of paraffin which melted when MESSENGER was low in its orbit and then froze when it was higher, thus removing some of the heat. Even with this incredible equipment, MESSENGER only sent back images for one earth year before the heat destroyed the probe's instruments. Altogether this planet deserves its nick name of Hades.

 

 

 

Ok, what struck me was the following:

1) no 5 paragraphs

2) he has a clear cut intro and concluding sentences for the whole essay.

3) each paragraph has a clear cut topic, but the topic sentences are not "in your face"

4) there is no concluding sentence in the first paragraph, but it does not seem to need it

5) there is a concluding sentence in the 2nd paragraph that synthesizes rather than summarizes (right before the last "hades" sentence)

6) the paragraphs use different styles: Paragraph 1 explains a concept and paragraph 2 lists details to support a introductory sentence.

 

So here is what I would like to discuss:

 

1) Do you think it is a worthy goal to create a non-formulaic writer?

2) If so, how do YOU go about it? And at what age?

3) If kids learn 5 paragraph essay early on, is it hard to leave it behind to become non-formulaic writers?

4) Would it be difficult to learn to write from the beginning without a formula, and then learn test-taking writing styles in high school?

5) Are formulaic styles required for computer graded exams like the SAT?

6) How would your grading criteria differ between formulaic and non-formulaic writing?

7) 5 paragraph essays are fast and thus very useful on essay tests. But tests are not the real world. Are they worth studying if you child is going into a STEM field? (In NZ there is no liberal arts requirement in University)

 

In her audio lecture, SWB clearly states "I have never assigned nor would I ever be pleased to receive a 5 paragraph essay." This struck me HARD, as I find 5 paragraph essays (or more paragraphs, whatever) easy to write and easy to read because they are so clearly outlined. You can find the structure. The road map IS the essay. But you never see them in the real world. Ever. I'm guessing because they are typically simple and boring.

 

WWS has very clearly influenced my ds's writing style. I would like to think for the better, but I still struggle to know how to clearly guide the development of a non-formulaic, writing-phobic, math-loving, pre teen!!!

 

Lots of musing with very few answers.

 

Thoughts?

 

Ruth in NZ

Edited August 17, 2012 by lewelma

[Deee]

Hi Ruth,

not sure I'm going to be any help, but I'll at least give you my thoughts. I had never heard of a 5 paragraph essay until I started homeschooling and reading US forums. It simply wasn't taught in Australia. I also had no idea of the various essay types, although I think they are taught in Aust now. I did very well at English at school (despite being a science and maths type). I think my essays probably were formulaic: intro: define the topic and tell them what you're going to tell them, first para=first point, etc, through to conclusion: tell them what you have told them and then state the conclusion. But no emphasis on opening and closing sentences in each paragraphs. We were marked on our ability to stick to this formula. Not exciting on the face of it, but clear and readable, and can be made exciting with good material and skilled language use.

 

What made me a fluent, organised writer was debating. I can't speak highly enough of it as a means of training logical thought, succinct expression and cohesive argument building.

 

What your son has done is complete the task (in fine style, I think), without adhering to any imaginary parameters. He's showing his skill as a writer. He's taken the reader on a journey, informing them on the way. I see writing as similar to maths: average maths students rely on a formula to guide them to an answer. True mathematicians work out the answer using their knowledge of the concepts. Its the same for writing: average and inexperienced writers hang their information on a formula (its safe and reliable). Really skilled writers take what they know and weave a readable narrative, depending on their purpose. Because they know and use language well, they don't need to rely on a formula.

 

I think your question about testing is really valid. I'm not teaching essay formulas to my son yet (he's 11), and I'm not sure I will until I think he already writes well (because I want him to THINK, not stick things in boxes, and he's a lazy bugger, so I think that'll be the kiss of death for any future writing development). But I do worry about testing down the track. Not Uni but if he decides to do the HSC, our year 12 exam, to get into Uni.

Danielle

[Laura Corin]

Hi Ruth,

not sure I'm going to be any help, but I'll at least give you my thoughts. I had never heard of a 5 paragraph essay until I started homeschooling and reading US forums. It simply wasn't taught in Australia.

 

I think it's worth learning what is required for exams in your jurisdiction, but that's a particular skill. There are many ways of organising a perfectly decent piece of writing.

 

The UK formula for GCSEs (exams taken at age 16) is Introduction, first para (statement, support, development), second para (statement, support, development), as many more paras as needed, conclusion.

 

Laura

[lewelma]

But I do worry about testing down the track. Not Uni but if he decides to do the HSC, our year 12 exam, to get into Uni.

 

I think it's worth learning what is required for exams in your jurisdiction, but that's a particular skill. The UK formula for GCSEs (exams taken at age 16) is Introduction, first para (statement, support, development), second para (statement, support, development), as many more paras as needed, conclusion.

 

That's what I learned in Dutch: intro-body-end. We use it for letters, speeches,essay's etc.

 

I completely agree that the test taking skill must be taught at some point. DS will be taking the IGCSE, so I assume we will follow the requirements that Laura described above. However, my concern is what Danielle describes below:

 

I'm not teaching essay formulas to my son yet (he's 11), and I'm not sure I will until I think he already writes well (because I want him to THINK, not stick things in boxes, and he's a lazy bugger, so I think that'll be the kiss of death for any future writing development).

 

THIS is my concern. Writing for these tests is not a life skill, it is a test taking skill. And I really hate to focus heaps of time on it, especially if it destroys this budding originality. One of the reasons we decided to homeschool was to avoid all the teaching to the test stuff, and do REAL learning.

 

So lets say, we focus on just writing while he is 12-14. Then, at age 15, we start the year long slog of weekly timed test-style essays. Then, go back at age 16-18 to focusing on writing well. I'm fine with that. (well, mostly fine.)

 

But then I am still stumped as to how to encourage/teach non-formulaic writing. From what I can tell, many writing programs use a formula of some kind and assume that kids will eventually leave it behind. Do they? And if you don't teach kids to write with a formula, how do you teach them to organize their thoughts?

 

As for learning to write well, I like the idea of joining debate. Must research that.

 

Thanks,

 

Ruth in NZ

Edited August 17, 2012 by lewelma

[Deee]

I'm modeling essay writing with my son for science and history. We read info about a given topic (say Marius and Sulla and their leadership of Rome), then we write a summary (which is really an essay) together. We might do a mindmap or a "who, what, when, where, why and how" outline, or use another outline like this template:

http://www.readingquest.org/strat/storymaps.html

These tools allow us to get the information out of the original text, discern what is important, and discuss other information, like our inferences, longer term implications, etc. Sometimes we put numbers beside things so we have an idea of the best order to include them, sometimes the order just flows naturally. Then we write the summary together: I write on the blackboard with him dictating, then we edit, then he writes it into his book (and edits a bit more). Its time consuming, but I can see it paying off. He can do a lot of it himself, but he HATES the physical act of writing (he has dyspraxia) so this system takes much of the disincentive out.

 

BTW, I think we foreigners are the only ones up......

D

[Laura Corin]

But then I am still stumped as to how to encourage/teach non-formulaic writing. From what I can tell, many writing programs use a formula of some kind and assume that kids will eventually leave it behind.

 

Beginning, middle, end. In practical terms, that might mostly become intro, middle, conclusion, but the arc leaves leeway for other beginnings and ends. The key, to me, is that the reader is satisfied: the beginning doesn't feel too abrupt and the end doesn't leave the reader hanging. I didn't use writing programmes much, just writing prompts.

 

Laura

[dbmamaz]

bravewriter is non-formulaic, but its more of a manual than a curriculum. i used the first half of 'help for high school' w my teen, who had been mostly through public school and his writing was . . . mmm, bad. anyways, i loved the program but felt he didnt get as much out of it as he could have because he thinks to narrowly. as i started reading the full writers jungle, i think thats her emphasis - that first you need to teach kids to think about things and learn to communicate them, and then you encourage them to write, and later to edit their writing.

 

i also think most kids are smart enough to learn that they should always write a 5 pp essay on standardized tests, and its a good bet for low level college classes, but that for anything else, go for what feels comfortable.

 

in fact, a LOT of writing is happening on line now - blogs, fan fics, articles - none of those are formulaic, right?

[regentrude]

1) Do you think it is a worthy goal to create a non-formulaic writer?

 

 

Yes, because I do not want boring writing. Formulaic is boring.

 

2) If so, how do YOU go about it? And at what age?

 

I do not impose a specified format, except for essays that serve specifically as preparation for standardized tests, from the very beginning on. I do not teach the 5 paragraph essay until 7th/8th grade. For any other writing they can choose the form that best fits their paper.

 

3) If kids learn 5 paragraph essay early on, is it hard to leave it behind to become non-formulaic writers?

 

I do not think so - if they have not been worked to death writing formulaic essays.

 

4) Would it be difficult to learn to write from the beginning without a formula, and then learn test-taking writing styles in high school?

 

Not at all. I have never been taught this kind of formulaic writing in Germany, but once you are a good writer, you can adapt to any given format if you understand the requirements. Writing according to a formula is easy once you CAN write.

 

5) Are formulaic styles required for computer graded exams like the SAT?

 

Yes. But not for the computer part; the essay is graded by actual people. Students are strongly encouraged to use the 5 paragraph format for this because it does not test creativity or originality, but boring mastery of a prescribed format.

 

6) How would your grading criteria differ between formulaic and non-formulaic writing?

 

For me, there would be no difference. I do not give credit for following the 5 paragraph format - I expect clarity of structure and content, and prefect mastery of English language mechanics. 5 paragraphs or not plays no role.

 

7) 5 paragraph essays are fast and thus very useful on essay tests. But tests are not the real world. Are they worth studying if you child is going into a STEM field? (In NZ there is no liberal arts requirement in University)

 

Other than in their English and history course general requirements in college, a scientist will never have to write 5 paragraph essays. Scientists will have to write original papers in scientific journals, ranging from 4 to 20 pages, depending on journal, and grant applications in a format prescribed by the agency.

 

In her audio lecture, SWB clearly states "I have never assigned nor would I ever be pleased to receive a 5 paragraph essay." This struck me HARD, as I find 5 paragraph essays (or more paragraphs, whatever) easy to write and easy to read because they are so clearly outlined. You can find the structure. The road map IS the essay. But you never see them in the real world. Ever. I'm guessing because they are typically simple and boring.

 

I see the 5 paragraph essay as a crutch, a tool for students to learn structure. Students need to master it for the purpose of doing well on standardized tests where such writing is required. But once they have done so, they need to move on.

I have never been taught to write such an essay (this form is not at all emphasized in Germany), nor have I ever had need to write such an essay in my life. The structure and length of a paper depend entirely on the content and the purpose. Very rarely will there be exactly three supporting arguments that one could cram into the 5 paragraph form.

 

I teach it precisely so my kids know it for the ACT and SAT.

[Penguin]

With the concern that this adds little to nothing to the discussion...remember the skill of the HANDWRITTEN essay.

 

At an IB parent meeting last year, the director of my son's IB program noted that so many kids needed to be taught how to write an essay without a computer. The kids had been brought up producing essays on the computer. Well, the IB essays and the SAT essays are still written by hand...something to keep in mind as you think about the skills that your child will need.

Edited August 18, 2012 by Penguin

[Create Your Ritual]

Hey there Lewelma,

 

I do have a question for you with regards to your son's essay. When he chose the topic from Scientific America did he go on to further research it before writing, or was this a synopsis of what he read and then he put it in his own words?

 

I think that at 11 years old he had clarity of purpose in his writing, and also wrote it in order so that it was easily understandable. I know you weren't looking for reviews of the paper though, but to talk about the non formulaic writing.

 

I really think it is fantastic that he can put thoughts together and have them be cohesive and make sense. I would say continue with WWS, but definitely give him the room to have these type of assignments to 'see' what he comes up with. I believe that can only create a level of comfort with writing. To give him a chance to create and explore and come up with his own variety would enhance any formula you teach him IMO.

 

That being said, I love the idea of learning how to debate. If he's interested I could see setting up a blog for him to write like this about topics. As they say with writing a novel, it doesn't matter if you have grand ideas in your head .. it's what is put on paper that counts. I am learning that just WRITING .. the physical act of writing is sometimes enough .. at least initially!

 

I say teach the formula .. whether its 5 paragraph, WWS or whatever so that he understands how to follow directions and do what is assigned. But I love the idea of giving him free reign as well. How to do that is up to you .. Bravewriter Style, Blog, Debate Club, etc.

[lewelma]

Thanks Regentrude for your thoughts. You have always had such a wonderful no-nonsense approach to teaching.

 

The structure and length of a paper depend entirely on the content and the purpose.

 

This is what I want to discuss. When I talk about the "5 paragraph essay," I am not actually referring to the 5 paragraph part, (that is very easy to adapt), but rather the set structure. How do you teach kids to come up with an appropriate non-formulaic structure?

[lewelma]

The standard set structure goes something like this:

 

Intro Paragraph: hook, thesis, summary of 3 ( or more) points you plan to make

3 (or more) body paragraphs each with statement, support, development

Conclusion: refer back to 3 (or more) points you have made, synthesize in some manner.

 

Ok, so if it is not THIS or something like it, what would it look like? Obviously each one would be different, otherwise it would be formulaic , but there must be some standard that makes for good writing. What is it?

 

Here are 2 intro paragraphs I found online. 1st is the standard formulaic style, and the second is without a formula. So how do you teach a student to write the second?

 

High school education has several problems which must be solved to prepare America’s youth for the challenges of the 21st century. Overcrowded classrooms mean that students do not receive the individualized attention that they need to succeed. Increasing rates of crime are making students afraid to come to school, and preventing students from concentrating while they are there. In addition, the lack of technological resources like state of the art computers is preventing students from being competitive in the workplace after graduation. These problems all mean that some students are falling behind.

When students fall behind, they need the attention of an instructor one on one to catch up. Because classrooms are so crowded, teachers are overworked. As a result. . .

OR

High schools across the country are bulging at the seams. As increasing numbers of Americans realize that education is necessary to attaining the American dream, our schools grow more crowded. At the same time, budget cuts have caused schools to cut back on the number of teachers. As the number of teachers has dropped, and classrooms have become more crowded, the quality of education in our public schools has declined. With a higher workload, burnout among even the best teachers has increased, and fewer people see teaching as the desirable profession they once did. Solving the problem of overcrowding by strictly limiting class size to 20 students would allow more students to get the instruction they need to become productive members of society, which is the most important goal of high school education in America today.

[regentrude]

How do you teach kids to come up with an appropriate non-formulaic structure?

 

You really should not ask me - I am not an English teacher. I am not even a native speaker. I just muddle my way through teaching writing.

Basically, my kids learn to write by writing. They write, I read and critique, we discuss how the writing could be improved. The next paper is better.

They know the obvious basics: introduction, middle and end; transitions between paragraphs/thoughts. I believe structure comes from the inner logic of the paper; so the most important skill to develop may be to think logically. If the writer thinks logically, he will develop his argument in a logical fashion, have some kind of logical thread throughout an expository paper, will not jump between topics - and will produce a paper a reader can follow easily. I find this impossible to teach in an abstract manner or by doing prescribed exercises (my kids would mutiny).

 

There is a much bigger emphasis on writing instruction in the US than I experienced in my home country. We wrote no more than three essays a year, plus shorter stuff. So I guess, if I learned to write decently, I did so by writing and reading and modeling. That is the approach I follow with my kids: I let them write with as few restrictions as possible, and I let them read quality literature of various genres to have a model. Time will tell if we succeed. So far, I am quite please with what I see.

 

 

ETA:

Ok, so if it is not THIS or something like it, what would it look like? Obviously each one would be different, otherwise it would be formulaic , but there must be some standard that makes for good writing. What is it?

 

I think there is no "standard", but all good expository writing has common features: a clear, logical structure that leads the reader easily through the argument and "Style" - the kind of writing that is pleasant to read, not dry, not overly wordy, without mannerisms. If I were looking for a formula, I might pick the rules of The Elements of Style (Strunk & White). Always with the caveat that technical writing in specific disciplines may require the violation of some of these rules (for example the use of the passive voice is perfectly appropriate in some disciplines)

Edited August 17, 2012 by regentrude

[lewelma]

Hey there Lewelma,

Hi back. Long time since we have talked about writing.

 

I do have a question for you with regards to your son's essay. When he chose the topic from Scientific America did he go on to further research it before writing, or was this a synopsis of what he read and then he put it in his own words?

Well, I just went and read the article (it was 6 pages), with the goal of finding where he pulled the information. He did not do additional research. What was very interesting is that his first paragraph does not come from anywhere. There is a piece here and a piece there scattered through the article, but ds actually pulled out these tiny bits of information to create a holistic explanation of why there has not been a probe there before. The second paragraph was a straight forward summary of a 3 paragraph section on instrumentation.

 

I am really impressed with that first paragraph and how difficult it would have been to write. So what I would like to know, is how to help him be able to do it again. What exactly did he do to achieve this success? Without knowing the "how", there is no way for me to help, except to say "good job." I would like to make the process he went through explicit.

 

I would say continue with WWS, but definitely give him the room to have these type of assignments to 'see' what he comes up with.

Definitely agree with you. I think that in 1 year, WWS has over powered his previous 3 years of formulaic writing (IEW and MCT). And I think I am beginning to see where SWB is going. Instead of teaching a student how to write a whole essay using a simple formula, she is teaching the student how to write individual parts of advanced non-formulaic writing. For example, I would never, ever put a descriptive paragraph in a persuasive essay. Or a narrative paragraph for that matter. But when you look at Rachel Carson's writing or even scientific american, you see both narrative and descriptive paragraphs in a persuasive argument.

 

So, here are a couple of my ideas as to how to help him write like Rachel Carson or MLK. :D

1) Really focus on the importance of clarity of purpose, both in the topic and in the slant

2) Go through good magazines like SciAm, Economist, Nat Geographic and look at HOW they introduced their essays.

3) Start identifying paragraph types in these articles and then discuss what each paragraph adds to the article. If it had been left out, how would your impression change?

4) Let them write with as few restrictions as possible (from Regentrude)

5) Let them read quality literature of various genres to have a model (from Regentrude)

6) Make sure you give them the opportunity to produce their best work. Topic of their choosing, enough time, access to resources, etc (from Sadonna)

 

Please help me make a list. HOW do you teach non-formulaic writing.

Edited August 17, 2012 by lewelma

[lewelma]

You really should not ask me - I am not an English teacher. I am not even a native speaker. I just muddle my way through teaching writing.

Ah, but it is your clarity of thought that I appreciate. I doubt you muddle though much. :001_smile:

Basically, my kids learn to write by writing. They write, I read and critique, we discuss how the writing could be improved. The next paper is better.

I am almost there. I think that there is just 1 more year of curriculum for us (LToW) and then we will be free of it. And I think that I have learned enough with my first ds to teach writing sans curriculum with my second. Experience is everything.

 

I let them write with as few restrictions as possible, and I let them read quality literature of various genres to have a model.

Excellent. Will add these to my list above.

 

Thanks!

[Create Your Ritual]

I don't know if you can teach non-formulaic writing, because then it becomes formulaic. I will be interested to see what others have to add to the discussion. IMO you are doing everything right by opening his world up, having meaningful discussions about events both in history and current, giving him good examples to read. Clearly it is already taking root. I know it is so easy to want to tap that 'magic' that happens.

 

I have read through some of my own dds descriptive writing, and the way she does it sometimes is very impressive to me. This was the beginning of a descriptive paragraph about the horse barn.

 

(Opening the first gate, I walk into the horse stable. I look down the long, narrow corridor with horses poking their heads out of their stalls to socialize with neighbors. Their soft, barely audible whickers and whinnies fill the room, bringing it to life.)

 

But, I have yet to understand HOW she does it or how to tell her to do it again. lol. I feel like she is a product of all the good things that have been shown to her, but at the same time it's just HER. She is a product of her environment, and you are certainly setting up a good environment for your boys. I do think that if they CARE about the subject they are likely to produce their best work, so for the non-formulaic writing I would continue to allow him to choose the direction and topic.

 

So nice to chat with you Lewelma!

[lewelma]

I don't know if you can teach non-formulaic writing, because then it becomes formulaic.

fascinating!

 

Opening the first gate, I walk into the horse stable. I look down the long, narrow corridor with horses poking their heads out of their stalls to socialize with neighbors. Their soft, barely audible whickers and whinnies fill the room, bringing it to life.

wow, wow, double wow.

 

I do think that if they CARE about the subject they are likely to produce their best work

very good point. will add this to the list.

[Create Your Ritual]

haha .. you make me smile. I know with my dd she has a mind of her own when it comes to what she wants to write. Now if I could just get her to care about something OTHER than horses. lol. I find that making her do it the WWS way works for the assigned pieces, but I almost have to get out of the way when it comes to purely creative or descriptive writing. She KNOWS what she wants to say. I think your ds is that way with academic writing in that he reads something and comes to his own understanding of it and it shows in how he writes about it. I don't think you can teach that beyond continuing to fill his mental tool belt with options that he can pull from when needed. The world will box him in soon enough if he allows it, so I just love that you gave him this open-ended assignment and allowed it to just BE.

 

I have a hard time with that myself because I innately think that all her writing needs to fit in to a pre-manufactured mold. I teach it because I feel I have to, but I love that he cared enough about the topic to go off in his own direction. It reminds me that THAT kind of writing is equally important.

Edited August 17, 2012 by SaDonna

[5LittleMonkeys]

Could it be through using various formulaic programs a student is able to build confidence and build an abundance of various techniques and skills so that they can, once they reach a certain level of maturity or experience, break away from those formulas and ... just write? They've got all these different methods and techniques at their disposal and pick and choose from them based on the message, purpose, or feeling they're trying to convey. They create they're own style that's a blend of everything learned over the years.

[angela in ohio]

I don't have a lot of time, but here are my quick thoughts:

 

In our house, formulaic is what you go *through* to get to being a great writer. I used IEW, but I did so knowing I could bring a student out the other side.

 

Yes, I think there is value to knowing a formula. For anyone other than a modern English or humanities teacher, a formulaic paper will likely impress. They won't know why, they will just know that "it sounds right" and seems competent. It is helpful for the SAT (not so much the ACT.) Dh uses a formula to write letters and reports for work when he has just miinutes to get them out, and he always gets positive remarks aobut them.

 

Dd had a pop essay test along with her HSPT when she thought she wanted to go to private school, and a quick formula 5-paragraph essay won her the highest score the counselor had seen on the essay. She said most of the other students around here just started writing, and when they talked during the break, it sounded like they had all done a "free writing" type thing, with no organization.

 

I also know what I've seen in working with many students. Contrary to what most would assume, the students who had been taught a forumla were more able to write well creatively and in a non-formulaic waythan the students who had been taught with a curriculum or teacher who eschewed formulas.

 

I think it helps to think of teaching writing as a process, and not look at each piece of writing as a final product. We practice skills; we build on them. In the end, I have excellent writers, but that doesn't mean that every paper was a masterpiece.

[angela in ohio]

Could it be through using various formulaic programs a student is able to build confidence and build an abundance of various techniques and skills so that they can, once they reach a certain level of maturity or experience, break away from those formulas and ... just write? They've got all these different methods and techniques at their disposal and pick and choose from them based on the message, purpose, or feeling they're trying to convey. They create they're own style that's a blend of everything learned over the years.

 

Exactly. :001_smile:

[Susan Wise Bauer]

Could it be through using various formulaic programs a student is able to build confidence and build an abundance of various techniques and skills so that they can, once they reach a certain level of maturity or experience, break away from those formulas and ... just write?

 

Yes.

 

Exactly.

 

THIS.

 

SWB

[lewelma]

Thank you Susan. We have loved WWS and its unique approach to teaching writing. Its deviation from the 5 paragraph essay is what got me thinking about this question. We are ready for WWS2 beta!

[5LittleMonkeys]

Yes.

 

Exactly.

 

THIS.

 

SWB

 

Good to know I'm on the right track!

[SailorMom]

Could it be through using various formulaic programs a student is able to build confidence and build an abundance of various techniques and skills so that they can, once they reach a certain level of maturity or experience, break away from those formulas and ... just write? They've got all these different methods and techniques at their disposal and pick and choose from them based on the message, purpose, or feeling they're trying to convey. They create they're own style that's a blend of everything learned over the years.

 

:iagree: Especially in the case of kids who do not like to write. Also - I don't consider it a test taking skill. Perhaps an academic skill as this sort of formulaic writing is what will get better grades (for the most part) in college academics.

[TippyCanoe]

.

Edited November 21, 2012 by Doodler

[regentrude]

Doodler,

I love your post. You can't imagine how comforting it is to hear such an experience about writing instruction from somebody who knows about teaching English. Gives a muddler like myself more confidence ;-)

[Colleen]

I don't consider it a test taking skill. Perhaps an academic skill as this sort of formulaic writing is what will get better grades (for the most part) in college academics.

 

This is a widely-held assumption, but whether or not it's true, we can't say. It wasn't my reality.

Could it be through using various formulaic programs a student is able to build confidence and build an abundance of various techniques and skills so that they can, once they reach a certain level of maturity or experience, break away from those formulas and ... just write?

 

Absolutely! This can be the case, but quite often, it isn't. As someone else said:

There are huge groups of students out there who are stuck in pre-determined structures, who write six to eight page papers as if they are just longer versions of the five-paragraph paper(.)

 

All things in moderation, and so it is with the five-paragraph paper (and five-sentence paragraph). It's a simple model, a false structure easily and quickly understood by the average student if and when s/he needs to learn it. It serves a purpose in a given situation, but is unfortunately relied upon as a security blanket by a slew of writing instructors and programs.

[Colleen]

For many kids, years of drilling 5-paragraph essays is not only unnecessary, but it can -- not always does, but can -- shrivel up their creativity and love of writing....So while structured, incremental programs are a great fit for many kids, they are certainly by no means necessary for all.

 

True. By the same token, I think we have to recognize that some students are going to write well ~ or, um, less well;) ~ regardless of what we do. My oldest is a naturally gifted whose writing was published as a junior at the community college. I believe writing would come easily to him no matter what I approach I took or what level of involvement I had. He wouldn't have benefitted from drilling 5-paragraph essays, but neither would he have suffered. We can twist ourselves into pretzels trying to find the "right" approach for a student and then accept the credit or blame, but sometimes, it just isn't about us.:)

Edited August 20, 2012 by Colleen

[SailorMom]

 

This is a widely-held assumption, but whether or not it's true, we can't say. It wasn't my reality.

 

 

[/color][/font]

 

 

Uh - widely held assumption?? In my many years in academics - this was absolutely the case. Perhaps it isn't for everyone - but you can't know that until you start college...

 

Doodler - I think having a daughter who enjoyed the process (ie - 'lots and lots of stories') rather than a son who abhors all writing (he's dysgraphic as well, btw) makes for a very different child to teach. Without tools - my son would be lost.

I think different methods work well for different kids - but, imho, the idea of the formula in writing should at least be covered, if not covered in depth.

[Mom-ninja.]

I need to come back and read this thread when I'm awake. :)

[LindaOz]

I don't know that you can teach non-formulaic writing, but you can certainly give opportunities for it to occur. In my house the kids have 'free writing' twice a week (of course, they can free write other times too if they want to...) where their writing is totally their own choice. Some wonderful stories have come from this time. Currently my 8th grader is writing extra episodes of The Ranger's Apprentice series; ds8 is writing a book about Lightning McQueen; dd15 has a major novel on the go; and two others are working on some sort of story. I have no rules for this - they just write. I think it builds confidence and writer's voice.

 

Of course, they cover various forms of writing in their English programs, but I love to give opportunity to write their own thing. I think too that a lot of their thoughts and ideas develop from their reading.

 

So, I have found that freedom to write in a non-formulaic way works well here.

[5LittleMonkeys]

Doodler - your writing experience with your dd sounds heavenly. Oh, how I wish it were that simple in my home.:D I am a natural writer myself...never needed much instruction and never used any particular formula for writing so it's been interesting to have dc who, while once they get going write well, need lots of structure, guidelines, and formulas.

 

I'm not an English major and have no experience teaching on a wide scale basis, but based on the myriad of writing threads that are on this forum it seems to point to the fact that the struggles I have are fairly common within this community. Why do so many struggle with teaching writing? Is it the teacher or the student? Many of us don't have English degrees and so don't have that experience to draw upon...we have to rely on purchased programs. We have to find a balance between using something to help us teach, which is often formulaic, and helping our students move away from remaining in that box.

 

I still hold that non-formulaic writing can't be taught, but it can be nurtured, modeled and encouraged. Even though I use programs that many would consider formulaic, I encourage writing outside of that program. For my own children, using what they have learned has made other writing ventures easier and manageable for them. They have to have those fundamental skills and knowledge in place before being able to experiment though.

 

I will say that after years of struggling to find what works with my dc I have finally compiled an effective method. It's threads like these that have helped me. Thanks for everyone's input!

[8filltheheart]

Doodler - your writing experience with your dd sounds heavenly. Oh, how I wish it were that simple in my home.:D I am a natural writer myself...never needed much instruction and never used any particular formula for writing so it's been interesting to have dc who, while once they get going write well, need lots of structure, guidelines, and formulas.

 

I'm not an English major and have no experience teaching on a wide scale basis, but based on the myriad of writing threads that are on this forum it seems to point to the fact that the struggles I have are fairly common within this community. Why do so many struggle with teaching writing? Is it the teacher or the student? Many of us don't have English degrees and so don't have that experience to draw upon...we have to rely on purchased programs. We have to find a balance between using something to help us teach, which is often formulaic, and helping our students move away from remaining in that box.

 

I still hold that non-formulaic writing can't be taught, but it can be nurtured, modeled and encouraged. Even though I use programs that many would consider formulaic, I encourage writing outside of that program. For my own children, using what they have learned has made other writing ventures easier and manageable for them. They have to have those fundamental skills and knowledge in place before being able to experiment though.

 

I will say that after years of struggling to find what works with my dc I have finally compiled an effective method. It's threads like these that have helped me. Thanks for everyone's input!

 

Aime,

 

I think the bolded is the key. A child that does not understand what a complete thought is will struggle with understanding complete vs. incomplete vs. run-on sentences. A child who does not understand proper paragraph construction will struggle w/understanding misplaced information, when to begin a new paragraph, etc.

 

I like the way Put That in Writing states it so simply. Underneath all good writing, the skeletal structure is going to look very familiar from one piece to the next. Those are the fundamental principles upon which all good writing is constructed. However, the flesh that covers the skeleton is what creates the distinguishing characteristics. W/o the skeleton, the flesh is just a pile of mush......illogical and a confused heap of incoherence.

 

When I teach my kids, when they are young we focus on the skeleton. Once the skeleton is mastered, what they do with it becomes their voice which fills out their creation. W/my older kids, writing instruction is restricted to stylistic/arrangement/rhetoric discussions b/c writing becomes the "artistry" of presentation.

[5LittleMonkeys]

 

I like the way Put That in Writing states it so simply. Underneath all good writing, the skeletal structure is going to look very familiar from one piece to the next. Those are the fundamental principles upon which all good writing is constructed. However, the flesh that covers the skeleton is what creates the distinguishing characteristics. W/o the skeleton, the flesh is just a pile of mush......illogical and a confused heap of incoherence.

 

 

Very nicely put.

[Colleen in NS]

Instead of teaching a student how to write a whole essay using a simple formula, she is teaching the student how to write individual parts of advanced non-formulaic writing. For example, I would never, ever put a descriptive paragraph in a persuasive essay. Or a narrative paragraph for that matter. But when you look at Rachel Carson's writing or even scientific american, you see both narrative and descriptive paragraphs in a persuasive argument.

 

Just checking in here while on a road trip, and this thread caught my eye. I haven't read everything as thoroughly as I usually do, but I wanted to say that the above is my impression, too. In a sense, WWS is formulaic, but not in the way a five-paragraph essay is formulaic. It shows you how to *think* about place descriptions, scientific descriptions and processes, chrono. narratives, etc., and then how to *use* them interchangeably, to *say what you want to say.* I think it's brilliant and freeing. And not-formulaic. But formulaic. But not really.

 

I had put WWS aside for a few months, thinking I could just wait and teach some of the same skills from the WTM rec'd. rhetoric materials (such as the Kane book - I think that's the book - mind blanking out as I'm not at home). But we picked WWS back up and will finish it soon (and will beta-test level 2 - can't wait!), because I realized I was at my limit with the winging-it phase of my teaching abilities.

 

I'm fairly confident my kids will be able to take their WWS charts/knowledge and be able to compose all sorts of paragraphs and weave them into essays freely.

 

Gotta run!

[Laura Corin]

I like the way Put That in Writing states it so simply. Underneath all good writing, the skeletal structure is going to look very familiar from one piece to the next. Those are the fundamental principles upon which all good writing is constructed. However, the flesh that covers the skeleton is what creates the distinguishing characteristics. W/o the skeleton, the flesh is just a pile of mush......illogical and a confused heap of incoherence.

 

 

Some children absorb good writing by reading, as some absorb good spelling by reading. I don't think that every child should be drilled through a very structured programme.

 

Calvin gets high praise for his essay writing at school. We did very little formal training in how to write. He read widely and I gave him tips ("Hmmm.... do you think your reader needs a bit of help to lead into the beginning of that piece....."). When he was about thirteen, I taught him essay-writing-for-exams.

 

Laura

[Ellie]

Unless you told him there needed to be five paragraphs, then I don't see the problem. :-)

 

I had never heard of a "five-paragraph essay" until I started homeschooling.

 

Writing Strands author Dave Marks did NOT teach formulas.

 

Not all essays in the world consist of five paragraphs. His two paragraphs told you everything you need to know. They are well written and concise, with a variety of setence types. I'd be pleased as punch.

[Colleen]

Uh - widely held assumption?? In my many years in academics - this was absolutely the case. Perhaps it isn't for everyone - but you can't know that until you start college...

 

Yes, I think it's a widely-held assumption that formulaic writing will earn better grades in college. I don't agree with the assumption. There are many instructors (such as SWB) who are less than impressed by a simplistic "five paragraph essay" appraoch.

[Colleen]

I do think that if they CARE about the subject they are likely to produce their best work...Now if I could just get her to care about something OTHER than horses. lol.

 

Identifying here ~ though in the case of my 14 yo it's soccer, not horses. This past year he took two online Bravewriter courses. In the first, he had the freedom to choose his subject matter and turned out one impressive piece after another. The second course, literary analysis of "The Merchant of Venice", produced very different (to put it politely!) results. Oy!

 

I don't know that you can teach non-formulaic writing, but you can certainly give opportunities for it to occur. In my house the kids have 'free writing'...I have no rules for this - they just write. I think it builds confidence and writer's voice.

 

Agreed! Freewriting is a valuable, integral part of our schooling.

 

Why do so many struggle with teaching writing?...We have to find a balance between using something to help us teach, which is often formulaic, and helping our students move away from remaining in that box.

 

In my case, I find it more difficult to teach something (writing) that comes naturally to me. I think the same is true for many people, regardless of the subject. (I can't be the only one who had a high school calculus teacher who could. not. fathom how anyone didn't just get it.;))

 

I like the way Put That in Writing states it so simply. Underneath all good writing, the skeletal structure is going to look very familiar from one piece to the next. Those are the fundamental principles upon which all good writing is constructed. However, the flesh that covers the skeleton is what creates the distinguishing characteristics. W/o the skeleton, the flesh is just a pile of mush......illogical and a confused heap of incoherence.

 

This is a good explanation. (Complete with good imagery; who wants to serve or be served a mushy pile of flesh?:D)

[TippyCanoe]

.

[PeterPan]

Doodler - I think having a daughter who enjoyed the process (ie - 'lots and lots of stories') rather than a son who abhors all writing (he's dysgraphic as well, btw) makes for a very different child to teach. Without tools - my son would be lost.

I think different methods work well for different kids - but, imho, the idea of the formula in writing should at least be covered, if not covered in depth.

 

Gender doesn't explain it all. Doodle's dd is dysgraphic (or at least was at evals several years ago), and my dd, although she didn't get the official label, still has issues with automaticity and low tone and whatnot that make her pencil phobic to compare with most boys.

 

As far as formulas, I would wrangle in your mind the idea of formulas vs. structure. Kids with executive function problems end up needing extreme help with *structure* and organization in writing. However structure doesn't have to mean precisely a *formula*. When we're saying formula right here, we're usually meaning something like: give me three points, each with two pieces of evidence, and structure the sentences this way (A, 1,2,B, 1,2, C, 1,2), etc. Structure means clear expectations. So if we look at something like WWE, the clear expectation and explicit structure is a bit different (from a formula). The structure becomes the topoi, and we have to work a bit more with them and walk them through the steps to help them SEE the structure inherent to each component of the topoi. You can still outline a good, non-formulaic essay and see the structure.

 

In other words, you could reduce the topoi to a formula if you tried hard enough. :lol:

 

I'm not convinced it's necessary to reduce a student's writing to formulas in order to overcome executive function deficits and get structured, organized writing out of our students. Further, I don't think it actually WORKS over the long run to take simplistic formulas and foist them onto gifted, non-linear thinkers who continually buck due to thinking other ways. Take my dh, bless his heart. He doesn't think in traditional outlines, but his teachers in school tried SO HARD to convince him that's how his brain ought to think and write. I was recently helping him edit a speech he was giving at a state organization, and I was blown away by how GOOD it was and how hard it was to follow. I say this is the result of taking a very non-linear, narrative thinker and shoving them into a linear outline mold that NEVER WAS GOING TO FIT.

 

I think his brain has actually been thinking in a *more advanced* way all these years, something similar to the topoi, and that instructing him in the tools of rhetoric would have actually done him better than formulas he couldn't adhere to and still communicate this thoughts fully.

 

I think if you do the flip side and acknowledge the topoi and tools of rhetoric and give them those tools to CHOOSE from, then they can determine what their brain is trying to do in each paragraph and what the most logical organization would be. Then, rather than having it foisted onto them, it's a tool they chose.

 

At least that's my theory now and why I'm pursuing writing the way I am. I got Corbett from the library, and it's exceptionally dense and not an easy way to learn anything, mercy. In fact, it took me a LOT of looking at WWE before I finally wrapped my brain around these crazy topoi and how they connect.

Edited August 20, 2012 by OhElizabeth

[5LittleMonkeys]

The other thing that makes teaching writing scary/difficult is that in most curricula, students are asked to write so much, all the time, without what I think must precede any good piece of writing: not only reading a work, but re-reading it; extensive discussion; a body of other works to draw on mentally for purposes of comparison; and time for all this to percolate through and process. I am by no means saying this is true of all kids who struggle with writing; but for many kids and with many school writing tasks, the need for a formulaic structure is stronger because the content of thought isn't there to provide a structure of its own.

 

This just hit me like a ton of bricks.

 

The dc I have the most trouble with in writing is the one that doesn't like to think. Having read what you wrote it seems so obvious now.

 

I've got to run, but I'm definitely going to mull this around a bit more.

[TippyCanoe]

.

[Colleen]

I forgot to add that one thing we do differently than most people is this: I write alongside my daughter. Many of our projects are group-based, involving the exchange of papers and stories or somehow are communal activities. Sometimes we write our own things, but sitting together and talking about our writing, reading it to each other and commenting as in a writing workshop. Other times we are writing similar things; for instance, we both keep notebooks of favorite literary quotations to discuss, or dd will have an idea she wants to try, and wants me to try too.

 

Co-writing or writing alongside your child, doing the same assignments or tackling the same ideas, puts the discussions you have about writing on another level entirely. I find I often run into difficulties I can discuss with her and so problem-solve something she might not be amenable to me overtly critiquing in her own writing. Or I discuss how different our composing processes are, which leads us into investigating how our favorite writers work, which leads to more discussion about the different ways people go about putting their thoughts down on paper.

 

I'm not saying this is somehow inherently better; I'm saying it really works beautifully for us, and is part of the way we do things in a non-formulaic manner. That is, I do not grade and critique her writing according to a formula or rubric the way I grade university student writing. I respond to her thoughts, I pass on ideas and book suggestions, I pose questions her writing may have raised in my mind or comment on connections she may have made that hadn't occurred to me. This is one way in which writing is social communication for us; she isn't usually writing something because I assigned it and will grade it, but because she's used to writing down what goes on in her mind, or because she has a brainstorm, or we are working on something together. I read it not because I assigned it and have to grade it, but because it's similar to discussions we have all the time -- she's offering me a look into how she thinks and imagines, only in a different format than an oral discussion. Often she writes as a form of indirect communication with a book and its contents; it's a response to what she's read, like a response in a conversation.

 

Thinking of writing in these ways rather than entirely in the context of assigned essays has allowed us to look at writing in a low-key way. I don't mean it isn't important, because it is -- it fills our lives. But it's an ongoing and ever-changing conversation and exploration that takes many forms, rather than a series of assignments or tests. One form it can take is an assigned essay or written response, and I have been asked to write essays from dd as well as the other way around. As with most of our other writing, if I assign one to her I write one too -- now there's a way to reduce writing load in your household in a hurry!

 

Goodness! This is lovely and enviable. Your daughter is fortunate to have you as a writing partner (and vice versa!). I'm fairly certain that all my guys would prefer having a root canal to discussing writing.;) Truth be told, I'm on that same wavelength. More often than not, I find that talking about writing (or reading, for that matter) decreases my enjoyment of those activities. I do join my children for freewriting, and we share our work with one another. I think in any subject, it benefits students to have their instructors come alongside and take part.

[SailorMom]

Yes, I think it's a widely-held assumption that formulaic writing will earn better grades in college. I don't agree with the assumption. There are many instructors (such as SWB) who are less than impressed by a simplistic "five paragraph essay" appraoch.

 

 

LOL- you certainly can't keep it simplistic! It is only simplistic when it is first being learned. Then - the freedom to jump off and change things- move stuff around, make it very personalized in style - can happen once the basics are understood.

If it is easily recognizable as a "five paragraph essay" when a person is writing in college, then the writing probably isn't very good. I took the model and expanded it to write a multiple chapter thesis paper (about 75 pages long). the structure behind it worked very well in organizing such a cumbersome project.

Anyway - the professors I have had liked how logically formatted, clearly presented, and easy to read my essays were, and they were all based on that model whether they were 5 paragraphs, 5 pages, or 5 chapters. These were not English classes - these were classes in history, science, economics, etc. These professors didn't care how original or pretty the writing was necessarily - they were looking for well understood information, logically formatted and presented papers.

Clearly this is from my own experience and my own opinions from that experience, so I'm just throwing it out there for consideration - being fully aware many disagree with me.

[Colleen]

LOL- you certainly can't keep it simplistic!...If it is easily recognizable as a "five paragraph essay" when a person is writing in college, then the writing probably isn't very good.

 

Unfortunately, some people can and do keep it simplistic, even at the collegiate level ~ as many college instructors/professors will testify.;)

 

It is only simplistic when it is first being learned. Then - the freedom to jump off and change things- move stuff around, make it very personalized in style - can happen once the basics are understood.

 

I agree, and in this respect, my experience isn't dissimilar to yours. But I don't consider what you described as "formulaic writing".

[TippyCanoe]

.

[Colleen]

Unless we're discussing our quotation notebooks, we don't discuss "writing" either; we discuss the ideas and the thinking(.)

 

Yes, this is what I understood you to mean, and what I had in mind in my response.:)

[1Togo]

For those of you who do not use structured curriculum, methods, etc. to teach writing, are your children natural writers? In other words, can they move from the ideas you discuss to printed form without a lot of concrete instruction? Also, can they easily move from models of articles, blogs, essays, paradies, etc. to creating that same type of writing? I've found that natural writers can do this more easily than non-natural writers. My non-natural writers have needed to learn sequential, discrete skills they can apply to other types of writing.