3) Response Recieved to Project 1

7/30/2019 3) Response Recieved to Project 1

1/8

Feedback System:As I have previously mentioned, I do not assign grades to papers; however, I understand that you allwant to have some indication of how I received your work. To accommodate this want, I will provide

each paper with either a+,, or-

A indicates that you have fulfilled the expectations of the assignment,

a+ indicates that you have exceeded the expectations for the assignment,

and a- indicates that you have completed the assignment but that your paper does not meet all ofthe expectations.

Additionally, if your paper has REVISE & RESUBMIT on it, you need to revise the issues I am

highlighting for you to receive full credit for the assignment.

Cover page: My thought process behind this article was to persuade others to see formulaic writing as

a necessary yet restrictive process that needs revision inside of the current curriculum. Writers are to

often taught that formula writing is the only way to write as opposed to something that should

eventually just be a guide. I think that my paper makes some good points about why formulaic writing

is a negative thing but also why elements of it must be kept. I think that I restate to many ideas and I

need to learn to make my paper more concise. Something that was very beneficial to me was the peer

response that I received from my peer partner as well as the miniature workshop that was conducted in

class. I received a lot of constructive criticism that shaped how I write as a whole and really how I

looked at my paper. The peer responses changed how I will look at future assignments in other classes

not just this class. This paper has enlightened me on new means of learning to write and has changed

my view slightly as to incorporating formula writing as a guide.


2/8

Powell 2

Jared Powell

Michael Johnson

English 1510

10/15/12

Formulaic Writing: A Necessary Evil

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. If the current curriculum was modified to

combine formulaic writing with other less-static forms of writing, formulaic writing could be seen as

not only acceptable but also an asset.

When it comes to formulaic writing, educators are divided advocacy or condemnation being

the generally modes of thought. Advocates of formulaic writing argue that using formulaic writing


3/8

Powell 3

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 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 (Smith 12). Among its

advocates formulaic writing is thought to offer students a tool to structure thought and feeling and

make creativity possible (Graff, Birkenstein). An example from Graff and Birkenstein would be the

following idea:

Introducing an ongoing debate: On the one hand, X argues__________. On the

other hand, Y claims__________. My own view is__________. In a long-

accepted argument, X argues __________, but Y and others disagree because

__________. In fact, Ys argument that__________ is now supported by new

research showing that __________. In recent discussions of__________, a

controversial issue has been whether__________. On the one hand, some argue

that __________. On the other hand, however, others argue that __________. My

own view is __________. As I suggested earlier, defenders of ___________

cant have it both ways. Their assertion that ____________ is contradicted by

their claim that_____________.


4/8

Powell 4

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.

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 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 stating that students are

encouraged to write in ways contrary to formula writing at high levels of education. 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


5/8

Powell 5

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.

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 material an 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


6/8

Powell 6

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 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 second and probably more important part 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 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.


7/8

Powell 7

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 and non-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 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.


8/8

Powell 8

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. Defending the Five Paragraph Essay

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.

Jared,

As I expressed previously, this is a very good paper. There are some gaps (essentially the gaps I

expressed previously), but the paper is still effective. The one biggest criticism I have, however, is the

lack of sources. As a reader, how ready are YOU to buy into an argument that has so few sources?

Outside from this, I have made some lengthy comments that you should read through. I made the

suggestion that you change content to structured writing processes (which would be a much stronger

and smarter turn in your argument) and also that you talk about introducing rhetorical awareness in HS

(via Kantz or Bitzer).

+

3) Response Recieved to Project 1

Documents

Transcript of 3) Response Recieved to Project 1