Mapping The Writing Of First Year College Students

So this article starts off questioning the caliber of literacy in writing, amongst  first-year college students. They have set up a study to find just what kind of writing these young students are getting into in their first year. Just like in every other article we have read this month,they have found that kids are generally spending most of their time writing with technology. Such as: texting, instant messaging, emailing, fan fiction writing online, and general typing essay's and papers for classes. Once again, just like every other article we have read, manly kids are only writing in these ways, and doing these surveys are shedding light on the contemporary values in the way teens are writing nowadays. It also shed light on just how important our "hand held" devices are to us. We honestly could not survive without them, and even I feel completely lost when I have forgotten my phone at home that day. This is really sad, but it is really true. They have found all of these things through a survey given to students enrolled in their first year of college, in their first year writing class. The survey asked quite a bit of demographic questions, and of course, questions about writing. They were then asked to rank their top five writing types that they do most often. Then they were asked which writing types they valued the most. As you probably already guessed,after they averaged out everyone's results, the number one writing type was texting, followed by e-mail at number two, and lecture notes at number three. What I did not mention was that even though the technology writing was at the very top, academic writing was still in the top five as most used and valued. I think this caught the researchers a little off guard, but I think it is something their little hearts should just swell over. I mean, I understand it being one of the most commonly used, I mean come on, I am academically writing right now, but I was kind of shocked at it being so high on the most valued list. And this was basically the gist of the entire article.

Writing and Technology

So this article starts off talking about how kids write an absolute ton through our teenage years. We write all through school, we write through social media, emails, texting, online messaging, and some even write fan fiction for fun. Writing for fun is kind of odd to me seeing I can barely get through this, but that is not the point. Then the article goes on to talk about the debate on if e-communication is damaging the way kids write or if it is inspiring kids to write more. So they hopped on the phone and start taking surveys on the subject from teens and their parents. It turns out that most all the teens from the survey agreed that forms of e-communication is purely communication. They seem to be considering this form of "writing" not even writing at all. They all seem to say there is a defining line between writing for personal reasons( such as texting, tweeting, emailing, etc..) and formal writing for school and school assignments. They also found that most teens do not believe that they incorporate all of their "social" writing habits but sometimes things slip through the cracks. Then the kids started fessing up that they know formal writing, where they may not enjoy it, will be essential in there future, higher education careers. Now the parents are starting to put their two cents into things. Parents are confessing that they write way more now in their everyday lives, then they ever did when they were teens. And the parents are also saying that their own kids are writing more now, in their teenage years, than the parents themselves ever wrote, during their teen years. Kind of interesting, huh? The government..pfsh. I also found it interesting that the study showed, the importance of writing is more valued in the household of African Americans and families of low income. it was also intriguing to know that teenagers, in their college preparatory English classes, believe that the instruction they are given about proper writing techniques is out dated and has room to improve. There's no clear winner in this debate, but we all have our own opinions.

Baron & Cullington

Baron- pg. 719
            Baron starts out with questioning, how instant messaging and text messaging may be degrading or diminishing our literacy and language. She questions if CMC is actually expanding our language and knowledge, or is it only hurting it. She goes on to explain that, while text messaging and Instant messaging is the new phenomenon in the United States, instant messaging and text messaging have already been a big deal in places like, Europe and Seoul. Then she goes through the history of how language was once always a spoken past time, and never published or sent to a friend in the matter of minutes via an aluminum box. She also goes on to talk about how at the beginning of the text messaging era, kids(most teenagers) were big into abbreviated text. Typical. Even now a days, we are still using some abbreviation like "lol" and "brb", but it is no where to the extent that it used to be. She finishes by saying that, while this modern tool for language can be a good thing, we need to not lose sight of our common knowledge education. Use this modern technology to expand our education and not weaken it.
Cullington- pg. 774
             Cullington starts off by talking about, none other, than the world of text messaging. whoo.hoo. He then starts talking about an article addressing  teens and their texting. The article seems to believe that texting is and, if not now, will downgrade a teens ability to become a proficient writer.And it is holding back our ability to be productive social beings. The article is now blaming texting for making people lazy. Is it not more convenient than lazy? The article is also talking about how abbreviated texting has become second nature to teens amongst their everyday spoken language. That sometimes we do not even catch that we are even doing it. Apparently, we are also avoiding proper punctuation and therefore we are not creating a muscle memory for it, and in the future, it will be harder for us to learn. He finishes the article by saying that texting could be a positive or negative tool for teens and their modern language. They will keep experimenting whether or not if it actually has an influence, but seems they will keep coming up with the same answer. We will never really know the truth.

D. Baron

         Baron starts out this article talking about how much technology we have , and how much we dis-value it. Especially when it comes to writing. He criticizes people for criticizing the new technology we use for writing. He finds that  some of the stuff we are using is incredible. And he is right! This article was published in 1999, so just imagine the even further advances we have made in technology, that can also be used for writing, that Baron did not even know about.
         He starts going through the history, or should I say, "evolution" of writing. He starts by going through the history of actual, physical writing. Like ink to bark. Pencil to paper. Pen to parchment. Whatever floats your boat. Then it goes to type writers. All of those endless hours of clicking, and one mistake and you are completely screwed. Convenient, yet not so convenient. Does that make sense? Then we move to computers. I can imagine that computers back in 1999 is not like what we are typing on today. Fundamentally? Yes. Quickness and ability to print, email, and edit with ease? Not so much. So skip a few steps and we are at today's computers. Yay!
         Now he is talking about how even back in the golden days of epic literature, people thought writers were weirdo's back then too. Now, I am not saying they are weirdo's now-a-days but society seems to label people who write for fun, kind of odd. And after taking this writing class, I would have to agree. Then he moves on to how we are establishing writing. We are not just at nut cases, writing screen plays, about two fourteen year old's, falling in love, and them killing themselves after only like, 2 days of knowing each other. We are at full fledged articles, journals, interviews, research papers, novels, screenplays, informational books, etc. I could go on forever, and I think that is the point that Baron is trying to get across. We may be crossing roads with new technologies and new way to do things, but writing , no matter how it is done, will be a forever thing.

Comparing Writing Processes

My writing process is way different from my partners. At first I thought I had no real process and it was pretty simple, but then I read John's process. Oh my lord. I have the world's best writing process compared to his, and that's sad. He doesn't have a process at all for that matter, so that should say something. At least I can brainstorm. And I even have an outline for gods sake. I even read! I love to read, I get so much inspiration for my writing ,from my reading. He also writes when he's lying down. Who does that?? And more importantly, how does he do that?? I have to sit at the table and have plenty of room. I also can't watch TV like he does and write. I get too distracted and can't concentrate. I mean, I don't like writing. I actually hate it. But I also know that, when you write, you have to have some sort of process for everything to run smoothly. He has nothing. Absolutely nothing. Yet he still makes A's on his papers? whaaa? That's just so ridiculous and unfair to me, that's it's not even funny. Like, that's not even normal? Rant over.  Anyways, our processes are very different from each others, and that's ok, because some things work for some writers that don't work for others.

Murray-2

1.) Murray's writing process seems very prolonged and time consuming. He records endless amounts if his "out loud" thoughts and aloud editing. He makes notes out loud on what he needs to do. Then he wrote really lofty drafts and made his critically acclaimed wife read over and edit them for him. In summary, his process is very long long and extended. My process is not so long and lofty. I don't do the "critical" things that he does, I very much stick to my outline. I like to keep my process short and sweet, even though it doesn't really turn out that way. The only thing we might do the same is have a significant other reread our work. I do this a lot.

3.) He found that "the writers" protocols shed new light on the great and small decisions and revisions that form planning. And that the decisions and revisions form an elaborate network of steps. He also learned that even with all of the decisions an revisions,  every writer has their own quirks and "ways" they do the things they do. I think he realized that every writer is different , so planning and revising can be difficult and different , based on who you are as a writer. But it can be done well, and efficiently or timely, depending on what you work or deal with best.

4.) ~He noted that problems arose from how the writers' particular work habits affected the gathering of data. ~When a writer is breaking ground conceptually, his pace slows. ~When in an unfamiliar, strange place, writers find it difficult to come up with good ideas and express them a good way. He's taking a "fresh" new approach and this is allowing him to solve these problems better, and more efficiently. Of course weaknesses will remain. No will ever be a perfect writer, editor, reviser, planner, etc. Except for maybe Shakespeare. Maybe.I feel like, having weaknesses are a good thing. How are we ever going to learn and expand, if we have nothing to learn from? And no one likes a know-it-all. There's just no way to be perfect.  

My Writing Process

I don't think I have a very specific writing process, but then again, when I think about it, maybe I am kind of picky. I generally have to be in a very comfortable, quiet, environment. So that includes either my bedroom, the back patio, or the library. I can't have distractions like TV or my phone, so I will usually turn on like classical music and keep it on low volume. Then I start my research. If I don't have any idea what to do for a topic, I will usually go skim over Yahoo! news, and that usually gives me an idea. Then I do my "in depth" research. I will use "Mel.org" for most of my resources. It's a database with articles, journals, magazines, newspapers, books, etc. You name it. They are very reliable sources. So then I start my outline. I start my outline kind of weird. I will always write my introduction to start my outline. From there I can form main points to form my body paragraphs. Then once I create my main points, mainly in bullet point form, I will write my conclusion. From this I can form my body paragraphs, which now I have a rough draft. This is where I modify my intro and conclusion to fit my body paragraphs correctly. Then I look it over and over and over, to make sure I didn't miss anything, and then I generally make someone else, credible, look over it. Once I get their feedback, I look over it a couple more times. Then I will go to a website like "knightcite" and put in all of my sources so that all my citing is done correctly. I then make my cite page. You know how the drill goes. "Alphabetical order, any lines under the first are tabbed, blah blah blah." Once I make sure the citing is done right, I will usually reread my writing again. I get very paranoid when writing. I hate being grammatically incorrect. It physically bothers me. Plus I don't think I am a very good writer. Anyways, by now I can probably print and staple, and get everything ready to turn in. And that's a ginger writing process.

"Rose" QDJ 1,2,4

1.) -A good essay always grabs the readers attention immediately.
     -Sentences that aren't grammatically correct, aren't useful.
     -You must always make 3 or more points in an essay.
     - Must present an array of images, ideas, & ironies gleaned from literature,
I have always been taught(1st rule) that grabbing the attention of your audience, first hand, was the key to a successful essay, but then I always linger and worry if my initial paragraph is not intriguing and exciting. I also get up with (3rd rule) making sure there are many points to my essay. So instead of broadening one particular point that would make for some good insight, I shorten everything up, to make sure I hit all the major points.

2.) So I think the big difference between the blockers and the non-blockers are that the non-blockers are more free and open with there rules, and blockers are more restricted and grounded to the book rules. Non-blockers leave an "open space" for there writing and don't get hung up on following a straight line of rules. I think whomever, or whatever, is teaching these kids are making the difference. You'll go by what you know.

4.) Free write! Don't get hung up on the idea of just writing to be writing, and not knowing what to write, but also don't just not write. Keep the pencils, or fingers, flying.

Writing Process of Famous Author

I would have to pick James Patterson. And if you have read any of his books you would know why. He generally is always working with a partner so that means, they are basically coming up with ideas together and are agreeing on decisions together, You would also note that he doesn't dwell on his chapters. His chapters are 2 to 3 pages long and generally no longer than that. And he will usually change subjects with each chapter change, which keeps you on your toes and keeps you diving head first into the book. Which I probably think is every authors goal. He is a very different and unique writer, and if you haven't already, you should really check him out. Start with the "Maximum Ride" series, It won't fail you. Scouts honor.  

Sommers

1.) Basically, we only understand certain vocabulary because we have been governed a certain way to do so.
3.) Well speech is an action out loud , and writing is done in private(for the most part). And if we don't ever speak what we are writing, will we ever revise correctly? I think that is what she is saying.
5.) I feel that if you are an experienced writer , you will test the waters and rock the boat, more to fit into your style of writing. Where as, if you are inexperienced you are more likely to stick to a "linear" process, because it is easier to follow a ruled out path to success than trying to find your own by being non-linear.
7.) I have always been taught that revising your work is basically reviewing your work to make sure everything is done correctly. And if it is not, make the appropriate changes. Not necessarily meaning to just change up your vocab.

Prior

2.) Preview, concepts, practice writing, analyses, initiating text, think aloud, retrospective writing, process logs, interviewing, observation of writing, involving data, conclusion.
3.) A composition are like pieces parts that are put together to make a whole "writing", where a inscription is a brief "summary" of historical/factual , information.
4.) It's important depending on what you are writing. If you are using different people to tell a story, you need to make sure each individual stands out uniquely. If you are writing as ONE person, you need to make sure that one person is distinguished as one.
5.) He he means that we have to identify who is creating the text ,and in what ways.
7.)concurrent: you have to be in agreement.
    retrospective: you're always looking in the past.
    naturalistic: very detailed but many theory's involved
     etc...
I find that I don't have a favorite because I don't with a big long process. If I write, I just write.

Literacy Narrative Review

                         I was not very confident nor proud of my narrative. I think I wrote a interesting and creatively, wordy narrative ,but I don't think it had the length it should have. Then again, how much can you actually write about your history with literacy. That is kind of a short topic, don't ya think? I think if someone is writing 1500 words on your history with reading and writing, they are probably "BS-ing" you and they're just putting in random nothingness to bring up a word count. And their narrative is probably boring and way to strung out. So was my narrative long enough? At your stipulation, no. But was my narrative probably one of the more interesting to read and easier to get through? Yes, because that was at my stipulation. And I couldn't write my literacy history in 1500 words.

Pg. 75 QDJ & Pg. 205 ODJ

(Pg. 65- 75) 

2.)  He explains that writing autobiography grows from our "taproots" and deepest childhood memories. I guess I would categorize his ways of writing autobiography's as very personal memories. 

5.) I would probably start writing more personally. I would open up and share some of my most important and guarded memories. I am definitely encouraged by his arguments to write more openhearted. 

6.) I wouldn't consider anything I've done recently to be what he describes as autobiography's. Everything I have done is very narrative or descriptive/creative, but nothing deep down, and personal. 

(Pg. 199-205) 

1.)  Well they are exactly what she said, "Superficial skills". It's something every child has learned in their high school years, and they are considered just basic skills.I completely agree with her!

2.) She is very right to assume that if were are only writing to improve our grammar skills, we are only going to write boring, pointless, meaningless writing. Stressing grammar skills does not open up creativity.   

3.) It definitely creates separation with mind from body, but we all knew that. I'm not sure school can actually create all this spiritual, mind, and body separation in a eye opening way, but I do believe school creates a creativity among your mind I don't think you could have created on your own.   

"Childhood Reading"

            My favorite thing to read ,when I was a child, was definitely "The Westing Game". I read it so many times because, you don't just understand it after only reading it once. At least at that age. (12 or 13) It held the reader with such mystery and unknowing excitement, I couldn't put it down. And like I said, I revisited that book so many times, just so I could come to a full understanding of the story. Once you understand what happened and "who" did what, it gave a very fulfilling accomplishment. I still read that book in my spare time.

          I was first learning to read around the first grade. They weren't picture books but they weren't long chapter books. I was only reading a few years above my "supposed to be" reading level. I was very influenced by my mom. She was an avid reader and still is. 

Jacy Johnson

(Pg.107-118, QDJ 1,2,3,&4)

1.)           He is definitely creating a big, extravagant story with this effect. If you’re not paying attention, it can definitely be confusing, but I think he is using this to capture his audience, and intrigue him.

2.)           He defines rhetoric as “the conscious use of language”. He also says that “rhetoric becomes a way of studying humans. It becomes the complete study of language, the study of the ways in which people have accomplished all that has been accomplished beyond the instinctual.”

3.)           I’ve tried imitating some creative writing but no matter how hard I try, I can never quit grasp the “creativeness”. I need to find better techniques on how to write in a more intriguing and captive way.

4.)           This resembles my processes as in, I can stare at a blank paper for hours on end, and the words will never come to me. I am not a writer, so actually having to sit, concentrate, and write creatively is very hard for me. 

" Skills to be Learned " 

I am familiar with all of these skills, but I am not particularly great at all of them. For instance, I know how to put all the correct information into an automated MLA website, but I would have no idea  how to do this on my own. I would also have no idea how to critique a peers paper, as I barely know how to critique my own, which there implies yet another skill I need to improve on. With that, I really need to improve on my brainstorming and organizing. I was never really taught how to do so, so I know that needs major improving.