7/30/2019 2) Project #1

1/9

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

2/9

What is a good writer? How do we make them? Can we make them? These are

some of the questions that English educators are asking all over the country and they

have been asking these questions for years. In an attempt to answer the ever-elusive

solution to these questions formulaic writing has emerged as a leader in the attempt to

manufacture good writers at a young level.

There are a lot of misconceptions in writing that are taught to developing writers.

These misconceptions by themselves hurt the writers ability to effectively and efficiently

express their thoughts and ideas. One of these ideas is the concept of formulaic writing

being the only mode of writing taught in schools to young writers. Writing is taught as

having a certain pattern or set of necessary guidelines that must be followed in order for a

paper to be deemed acceptable or well written. Examples of formulaic writing can

include but are not limited to structure and template styles such as Jane Schaffer and the

famous five-paragraph essay. In reality these forms of writing are acceptable if they are

combined with other forms of writing. If the current curriculum was modified formula

writing could be used as an asset.

When it comes to formulaic writing there are two modes of thoughtadvocacy

and condemnation. Advocates of formulaic writing argue that using formulaic writing

forces developing writers and teachers to learn a common language when talking about

writing (Wiley 62). This happens through the knowledge of the formula itself and the

universal ideas and language that everyone familiar with the style picks up. Having a

universal language allows teachers to collaborate and share ideas but more importantly

allows for a continuous uniformity in what students are taught regarding the writing

process (Wiley 62). An obvious benefit is seen in having common lexicon and limiting

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

3/9

the concepts a student must learn. It allows for teachers and students to easily discuss an

essays structure (Wiley 63).

Advocates of formulaic writing also argue that formulaic writing empowers

students to learn how to organize their ideas. Young writers often times get lost in the

daunting task of writing and lose sight of what they are trying to say. By using formulaic

writing a student only has to plug in his or her original ideas to reach a higher level of

productivity in the writing process (Novick 12). Among its advocates formulaic writing

is thought to offer students a tool to structure thought and feeling and make creativity

possible (Graff, Birkenstein). This mode of writing is seen by many as a powerful tool to

enhance the creativity and writing ability of writers that struggle with formulating their

own essay structure.

The opponents of formulaic writing argue the opposite. Opponents of formulaic

writing do not generally argue against the benefits of having a common language but they

do argue strongly against the emphasis this type of writing places on structure. By

teaching students that this kind of writing is the correct way to write developing writers

learn bad habits that force them into stifled levels of creativity and restrict their ability to

think creatively. This emphasis on structure is the only thing that students are taught.

This never allows for other types of writing to sink in and the inevitable result ends with

students clinging to the formula like a life raft from which they never want to

disembark (Wiley 65). Formulaic writing does the writer a discourtesy because young

writers especially need carefully structured assignments, but do not benefit at all from

repetitively forming their ideas around the same model time and time again. Students

who participate in this kind of writing develop a dependency on the structure and on the

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

4/9

teacher who has often times already decided that the structure is what will be rewarded

(Wiley 65).

Opponents of formulaic writing further argue against the structure by using what

is taught at higher levels of education as a piece of their argument. Students are taught

that finding a niche or a place for their writing is important. They cannot do this if

everything they write fits a predetermined mold. Students must develop a repertoire of

strategies for dealing effectively with various writing tasks presented to them in different

situations (Wiley 64). Its opponents see the goal of formulaic writing as a means of

producing a paper of a requisite length that does the writer a discourtesy. It is argued that

because the paper is judged off of its structure there is no relationship between structure

and ideas because anything can be placed to fit into the same form (Wiley 64).

I believe that formula writing has both benefits and negative effects on a

developing writer. There is a definite benefit to having a common language regarding the

writing process and continuity in the education of developing writers is important.

However, I also believe that these formulaic styles of writing restrict the ability of the

writer to express thoughts and ideas completely and efficiently simply because this is all

that is being taught to students. If formulaic writing were encouraged more loosely as a

suggestion or guideline as opposed to a final template to follow while writing than

developing writers would achieve the ability to interpret ambiguity in research and better

understand the nuances of language. This would result in the writers ability to express

more complete and efficient thoughts and ideas. I believe that both formula writing and

non-formula writing can work together ultimately enhancing the ability of the writer in an

effort to produce clearer more insightful pieces of writing.

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

5/9

First looking at structure it is easy to see the benefits of formulaic writing. Using

the Jane Schaffer formula as an example it is evident that formula writing allows for

students to separate facts from opinions. The Jane Schaffer method includes a topic

sentence followed by a fact supported by two commentary statements (Wiley 62). This is

important because it allows for students to begin seeing what is generally accepted and

what is ambiguous. There is no room inside of the formula for more than a fact and two

commentaries per paragraph. However, without this structure a developing writer would

not have been able to pick out the facts from ambiguous materialan obviously

important part of the writing process.

The structure of Jane Schaffer is not the only formula that allows for this sort of

organizational discovery. The five-paragraph essay works in a similar way. Instead of

wandering around looking for ideas and ways to express them the five-paragraph essay

presents a clear way for the writer to introduce, develop, and conclude (Smith 16). This

is seen through the structures opening, three body, and closing paragraphs. Mastering the

structure of this formula presents a similar predicament to the Jane Schaffer model.

Students can start to organize and express their thoughts, but they can only do so within

the formulas limited confines.

The structures of these two examples are representative of most formulas. They

present a clear template for the writer to use when producing a final product, but they do

not allow for an increased level of thought as to the ambiguous nature of almost every

form of literature. If these structures were presented in a looser manner incorporated

with the other more free writing structures students would not only be able to gain the

ability to organize their thoughts but they would also be able to explore ambiguous ideas

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

6/9

and statements that inevitably will come up. It is obvious that these formulaic writing

styles can organize students thoughts. If they were not so unforgiving in what they

allow and they permitted exploration and expression that other forms of writing include

developing writers would reach their full potential.

The secondand probably more importantpart of formulaic writing compared

to other forms of writing is the content. Content and structure go hand in hand and touch

on a lot of the same issues, however, content breaks off into more important issues

regarding the long time effects that formulaic writing can have on a writers ability as he

or she advances through the education system.

An example can be seen in the type of writing that occurs in high school

classrooms. Aside from teaching catering to organizational help most teachers present

the writing process to their students with SAT scores and standardized test scores in

mind. It is proven that formulaic writing styles score higher on test scores (Wiley 62).

While it is important for students to do well on large tests, like the SAT, what happens

when they get into college and those large tests are no longer a factor? What do students

do when standardized testing ends and professors and educators expect intelligent

responses to questions that dont have a factual answer? Students cling to these

formulaic styles of writing because they do not know anything else (Wiley 65). Their

styles of writing are not conducive with that of free thought and exploration of ambiguity,

which results in a lack of preparation for the collegiate level after high school.

Early writers benefit greatly from the organizational skills that formulaic writing

teaches, however, these same early writers suffer from a lack of knowledge and ability to

effectively express any form of exploration past the formulas. Similarly, without

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

7/9

freethinking forms of writing students cannot fully express ideas and explore deeper

meanings in given texts. There must be a better way to teach writers in order for them to

gain the benefits from both forms of writing.

To better integrate both styles of writing into the curriculum we could change the

current curriculum. From grades one to eight formulaic writing should be taught because

this is an age at which students are typically incapable of forming their thoughts into a

structured piece of writing. Formulaic writing presents a pattern and restricted structure

that can teach young writers how to write and decipher fact from ambiguous statements.

Once students reach high school they should be taught how to write in a way that

questions ambiguous statements. Formulaic writing should start to integrate with a non-

formula style of writing but it should not be completely let go of in grades nine through

grade ten. By eleventh grade all forms of formulaic writing should be let go of seeing as

by this time students should have an idea of how to write correctly using the formulas as

guides as opposed to templates. Not only would this allow for students to score higher on

standardized tests, but it would also prepare them for higher education where they can

really have a voice and express important opinions regarding any number of topics and

issues.

If there was more room for creativity in writing with formula writing students

could not only clearly organize their ideas, but they could also explore and continue with

creative thought. By just using formula writing or non-formula writing as opposed to

using formula writing andnon-formula writing students are denied the ability to reach

their full potential. This can be achieved by restructuring the current curriculum to teach

formulaic writing styles first and then integrating them with non-formula styles of writing

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

8/9

with the ultimate goal being to move away from formula writing all together by the time

students reach college. By combining the writing formula structure with the freeness that

comes from other forms of writing any writer can maximize organizational skills as well

as creative analysis skills.

7/30/2019 2) Project #1

9/9

Wiley, Mark. "The Popularity Of Formulaic Writing (And Why We Need To

Resist)." English Journal 90.1 (2000): 61. Biography Reference Bank (H.W.

Wilson). Web. 5 Oct. 2012.

Kerri Smith

The English Journal , Vol. 95, No. 4 (Mar., 2006), pp. 16-17

Published by:National Council of Teachers of English

Article Stable URL:http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047081

Birkenstein, Cathy, and Gerald Graff. "Point Of View: In Teaching

Composition, 'Formulaic' Is Not A Four-Letter Word." Style 42.1 (2008): 18-21.

Academic Search Complete. Web. 5 Oct. 2012.

JM Haro, et al. "Antipsychotic Monotherapy And Polypharmacy In The

Treatment Of Outpatients With Schizophrenia In The European Schizophrenia

Outpatient Health Outcomes Study." Journal Of Nervous & Mental Disease 200.7

(2012): 637-643. CINAHL Plus with Full Text. Web. 5 Oct. 2012.

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nctehttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nctehttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nctehttp://www.jstor.org/stable/30047081http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047081http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047081http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047081http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ncte