Let me add me 2 cents (USD) on points of agreement and disagreement:
- Writing is important in most professions.
- The digital life demans "more" writing.
- Writing is teachable/learnable.
- Greater TA training and support are needed.
- Writing is not "one thing" as it is imagined in the article.
- Writing is not a decontextualized "skill" as it is conceptualized in the article.
- The following phrase from the article is problematic because it (incidentally)
alludes to two approaches to writing that are currently out of favor:
"explaining how language works as a system, how it works psychologically" This
phrase suggests 1) Structuralism/formalism and 2) Psychological models (e.g.
Flower & Hayes).
- I don't think the writer understands "writing across (throughout) the curriculum."
- The article misrepresents the history of the writing instruction. The
first-year composition was never successful when it was first established in 1872.
- The "empirical evidence" is unclear.
- Explicit knowledge of grammar does not (easily) translate into effective writing.
I'll add this on Roger's wiki as well.
Tosh Tachino, M.A., B.A. Honors
Ph.D. Candidate, Iowa State University
Rhetoric and Professional Communication
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
To leave the list, send a SIGNOFF CASLL command to
[log in to unmask] or, if you experience difficulties,
write to Russ Hunt at [log in to unmask]
For the list archives and information about the organization,
its newsletter, and the annual conference, go to