There are two bad ideas about writing being focused on in this essay, Writers Are Mythical, Magical, and Damaged and First-Year Composition Prepares Students for Academic Writing. These ideas not only doesn’t help students with writing, but it also hurts them in their journey to become excellent writers. So a better idea is to throw these ideas away and one, Think about writers as a realistic career, and two, better realize the potential of the first-year writing.

“Writing” by jjpacres is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

In Teri Holbrook and Melanie Hundley’s essay, Writers Are Mythical, Magical, and Damaged; they explore the representation of writers in popular media such as television shows, films, books and why these depictions of authors and writing paint them in a harmful and reductive picture of writing. To a point where both young writers are disincentivized in pursuing writing as a career and writing itself is believed to be effortless, causing it to not be valued in a labor sense and downplaying non-individualized work that goes into writing. The two authors instead show a good idea of realizing that these stereotypes of writers in media are not always to be sought out or even something that’s bound to happen and that writing is a realistic career that works like many other careers.

“Watch Eye TV” by CJ Sorg is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0

One of the sources Holbrook and Hundley had was Jane Piirto’s work on the Roeper Review,  Themes in the Lives of Successful Contemporary U.S. Women Creative Writers. Piirto’s article focused on the similarities of successful female writers and life. Many of these themes include unfortunate family situations, great teachers, and early reading habits, along with many other things(Piirto). The data makes the writers seem grounded but some of these themes may make people think that these things are ways that make writers different than others. However some of them could be said about how they’re similar, and it may seem that Holbrook and Hundley used this for their essay. For example, feeling like an outsider is a common theme for some of these writers but also something that many people all over suffer with. The data also show how writing is not much of an isolated job as some would say because getting an agent is helpful for building a successful career as a writer. These themes also help if anybody truly wants to be a successful writer, because as Holbrook and Hundley say, “analyze common themes circulating about writers and then strategize ways to combat them”(Holbrook and Hundley). 

“Civil Discourse” by Chirag D. Shah is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

But there are also arises a bad idea with how the public believes of how education teaches about writing, and that idea relates to first-year composition. Tyler Branson’s essay talks about this idea, “First-Year Composition Prepares Students for Academic Writing”. In his essay, Tyler explains how limiting people’s perception of first-year college writing is done, holding it to an old fashion way of mostly improving grammar and spelling. This outdated idea of the way first-year college writing teaching is done limits what could be taught in the classroom and doesn’t help prepare students for the academic writing that entails for them in the rest of their college experience. Tyler introduces the idea of the great potential of using First-year Composition as a way to develop a student’s use of language and their use of civil discourse.

In the process of this idea, Tyler uses Joseph M. Williams’ article, The Phenomenology of Error, which is located in the College Composition and Communication book. In the article, William puts the focus on the differences of how “errors” in papers are evaluated and how rules of grammar are enforced to and from different people. There is a point in the article where Williams takes an example from many writers’ published papers and took sections of text that had an error of some kind and yet no one, even the writer themselves noticed these errors. Williams even says that “if we read any text the way we read freshman essays, we will find many of the same kind of errors we routinely expect to find and therefore do find” (Williams). It seems that Tyler used Williams’ text to further emphasize the point of the value of teaching correction in first-year comp. It’s not much of a thing most people consciously look for when reading a paper. It’s a great skill but not something to put much focus on in academic writing.

“Academic Writing” by Max Choong is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0

Simply put these bad ideas are not good enough for these young writers. If people want these students to succeed, they would have to understand what these authors said and understand a better idea. That writing is a realistic career and better using writing opportunities that are introduced to students in the first year of college.

Work Cited

Holbrook, Teri, and Melanie Hundley. “Writers Are Mythical, Magical, and Damaged.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, Digital Publishing Institute, 2017, pp. 53–59, textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf.

Piirto, Jane. “Themes in the Lives of Successful Contemporary U.S. Women Creative Writers.” Roeper Review, vol. 21, no. 1, 1998, pp. 60–70. Crossref, doi:10.1080/02783199809553933.

Branson, Tyler. “First-Year Composition Prepares Students for Academic Writing.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, Digital Publishing Institute, 2017, pp. 18–23, textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf.

Williams, Joseph M. “The Phenomenology of Error.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 32, no. 2, 1981, pp. 152–68. Crossref, doi:10.2307/356689

Professors, Linguists, and even parents have been arguing for many years about the pros and cons of texting, some might argue and say it decreases the students’ ability to use proper grammar and vocabulary, letting students butcher English words freely but others believe it enhances the way we learn about Vocabs and the English language in general. So, the question is, does texting ruins literacy skills? I believe the answer is NO, it doesn’t, and here’s why!

“Texting” By Asterfolio, Unsplash

In the book Bad Ideas About Writing, author Christopher Justice explains the misconception about texting, The title of his essay, and the topic that he signifies the idea that texting destroys one’s ability to have literacy skills. According to,” Texting Ruins Literacy Skills,” Justice argues that it’s just a myth, and stresses that it’s crucial to end this myth.   

Justice gives a reason why it’s crucial “One reason is that in many contexts, texting allows writers more time than speech to formulate their thoughts, and like other types of electronic media, texting also allows ample opportunities to revise and organize one’s thoughts. Second, the sudden and rapid popularity of texting is radically disproportionate to illiteracy rates.” (Justice, 310) In another word, a writer can express their ideas or feelings more efficiently by just texting than through talking Furthermore, texting provides clarity of someone’s thoughts. In his second reasoning, the author states, since everyone is texting and most people do not think texting hurts our literacy, if that was true, the literacy rate would’ve decreased and we would’ve stopped texting. Also, it is worth mentioning, this generation is by far literate than any other generation that lived before it. 

“Text Notification” by Jamie-street, Unsplash

In Jessica Gross’s TED blog post, “Texting as a “miraculous thing”: 6 ways our generation is redefining communication“, Jessica paraphrases the TED Talk speaker and linguist John McWhorter by writing “texting shouldn’t be categorized as a written language –but as [a] speech.”, Through a linguist perspective, McWhorter strongly believes that texting encourages a strong form of communication through writing, as brief as it may be.

 “Message Apps” By Adem AY, Unsplash

There are dozens of slang words and phrases many students text in their everyday communication, such as FYI, WYA, BTW, etc. Justice explains that those abbreviations are not new in the linguist world people have been using abbreviations for many years and we shouldn’t be surprised. Justice further explains “Ultimately, the abbreviated language that characterizes texting discourse is a continuation of a historical trend that reveals how people have creatively used language for conciseness and efficiency,” what he saying is, it’s just a generation difference and creativity that made people think it’s a new trend but history shows that’s not true.

In conclusion, Christopher Justice, Jessica Gross, and Jhon McWhorter’s ideas came together in the essay “Texting Ruins Literacy Skills” on Bad Ideas About Writing. Texting not only improves users’ ability to read and write it is also one of the fastest ways to convey information to others. By texting, one learns how to spell words regularly which enhances one’s Literacy skills. 

Works Cited

Justice, Christopher. “Texting Ruins Literacy Skills” in Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E.Ball and Drew M. Loewe, 30-33.

Jessica Gross’s TED blog post, “Texting as a ‘Miraculous Thing’: 6 Ways our Generation is Redefining Communication”

“Myths Word on Card Index Paper,” SinARTCreative, Unsplash.

Similar to many other false rules discredited in the book Bad Ideas About Writing, the idea that the English passive voice should be avoided at all costs is highly emphasized in writing culture. In Collin Gifford Brooke’s essay “The Passive Voice Should Be Avoided,” he addresses faults in arguments urging the use of the passive voice and proposes a better alternative. With the help of Geoffrey K. Pullum’s “Fear and Loathing of the English Passive,” Brooke concludes that teaching its appropriate uses and allowing writers’ discretion in its usage is a better alternative to avoiding the passive.

One of the most prevalent criticisms leveled at the passive voice is the inexactness it may lend. Because of its ambiguity, the passive voice is often used to label writing as weak and inferior. Brooke explains that “when we consider a single sentence, more often than not, the most direct version will appear to be the better option.” (141). Arguments against the passive fail to consider the reality that writing is often extensive and surrounding sentences are related to one other. Sentences within paragraphs provide context that allows for the appropriate usage of the passive voice, which introduces variety and improves the quality of a writing.

AlexLMX, Unsplash.

Furthermore, advice to choose active over passive for its assertiveness ignores the fact that not “every sentence is supposed to come at you like a punch in the gut…” and erroneously assumes that “passive clauses can’t deliver a gut punch.” (Pullum 19). When writers are fully educated on the proper context for employing the passive voice, they can recognize and recreate these conditions in their work to skillfully integrate the passive. In addition to being able to identify situations where they prefer the passive, they can maintain control over the nuance and subtlety of their work without adhering to the hard and fast rule of always employing the active voice.

“Deception,” Gustavo Muñoz Soriano, Unsplash.

Another common allegation about the passive voice is that it obscures accountability. Critics claim that because the passive voice does not explicitly indicate the subject of the actions within a sentence, it buries the subject and obscures their involvement. This accusation is related to that of the previous paragraphs in that it is derived from poor examples of passive usage. It is not wholly baseless as the passive voice can be used to obscure responsibility, but so can the active. Pullum addresses this in his article, noting that “Omission of the passive complement (not simply use of the passive) permits agents to be left unspecified. … They are not the slightest bit sneaky or evasive when the identity of the agent is either thoroughly irrelevant or entirely unknowable.” (18-19). He explains that ambiguous agents are caused by inappropriate use of the passive, not by the passive itself. Reinforcing the premise that with proper education on how to use the passive voice, writers would not have to obey the rigid rule of avoiding the passive voice. 

Brooke also indicates agreement with this in his essay. “The passive voice can certainly be abused, but in the hands of a skilled writer (like Rockmore), it is an invaluable strategy.” (Brooke 143). Additionally, this feature is a grammatical concept that can be employed to ensure cohesive flow and refine a writer’s skill set. Teaching proper passive usage enables writers to make the most of this concept in its proper circumstances. For example, it can be used to introduce elements of suspense to a work of fiction. 

“Two People Shaking Hands,” Cytonn Photography, Unsplash.

Throughout their articles and with the help of various examples, both authors make it clear the allegations against the passive voice can be summed up to oversimplification and incorrect understanding/usage of its suitable contexts. Well-meaning advisors and advice recipients are uneducated on the actual context required by the passive; the blind leading the blind. The rational solution is to shed light on effective and befitting passive voice usage by properly teaching it. Both authors are also unified in this conclusion. “We should be teaching writers the skilled application of the passive voice, rather than teaching them to avoid it altogether. Understanding sentences in context rather than isolation would allow writers to take up questions of cohesion and coherence.” (Brooke 143). Brooke suggests that teaching applications of the passive would be more advantageous than avoiding it. “The standard teaching about shunning the passive should be abandoned entirely. … Intelligent discussion of how non-canonical clauses fit into discourses just might have beneficial effects on the work of novice writers…” (Pullum 22). Pullum reinforces the alternative deliberate approach to teaching what situations are appropriate for the passive voice.

Ultimately, the passive voice, like the active, can be used in deceptive ways. Nonetheless, it is useful in its respective settings and can significantly enhance the quality of a writing. It would be more beneficial to teach the proper usage of the passive voice and empower writers to choose which voice they believe works best in any situation.

Works Cited

AlexLMX. “Human Stomach With Boxing Glove,” Unsplash, Unsplash, 5 December 2018, unsplash.com, Accessed 06 December 2021.

Brooke, Collin. “The Passive Voice Should be Avoided.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, Digital Publishing Institute, 2017, textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf. pp. 139-43 Accessed 09 Nov. 2021.

Cytonn Photography. “Two People Shaking Hands,”  Unsplash, Cytonn Photography, 23 March 2019, unsplash.com, Accessed 06 December 2021.

Pullum, Geoffrey. “Fear and Loathing of the English Passive.” Science Direct, Science Direct, 22 January 2014, sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0271530913000980. Accessed 09 Nov. 2021.

SinARTCreative. “Myths Word on Card Index Paper,” Unsplash, Unsplash, 26 April 2018, unsplash.com, Accessed 06 December 2021.

Soriano, Gustavo. “Deception,” Unsplash, Unsplash, 24 May 2020, unsplash.com, Accessed 06 December 2021.

As of 2021 there are many changes in this country, but many problems still occur. Such as discrimination, not just towards grown adults but to students too. Pattanayak begins to shine light on the problem by writing the essay “There is One Correct Way of Writing and Speaking”. Her bad idea about writing was that America makes foreigners believe that English must be perfected and if not, the person will be treated less then. At the end of this essay, she lists some sources that have more insight on this matter. The source that will be used is “Growth Mindset: How to Normalize Mistake Making and Struggle in Class” by Katrina Schwartz. This article explains how “productive failure” can help children with their process. This is a better idea since it helps kids better learn and understand that failing does not mean that student is bad. As this idea has been tested on several students it has had an impact on students mindset. Since it teaches them to try different methods when they are stuck.

What exactly is the problem? Well as Pattanayak has mentioned this is a problem with the education system. It is designed for middle class white students and not for foreigners that would also want to expand their education. But this mentality has changed as teachers have been finding new methods to better educate children. Schwartz has mentioned that some Stanford psychologists have found that when children know that they can craft their brain to work better, they have a better time understanding new matrerial. The method productive failure (created by,Dr. Manu Kapur) helps give hope and chance to improve their mistakes. When people are stuck, many people would just like to give up. By teaching children that being stuck does not mean failure it gives encouragement of doing better. After some time people begin to realize continuing after failure gives good effect, well teaching young children this will also be a life skill. Pattanayak says in her essay that minority student has trouble communicating and that can effect opportunities such as jobs. As this makes students feel un-needed, many give up and lose their student visa. Therefore Schwartz method would help with the struggling, but instead of getting kicked out of the whole class there could be extra time given. Extra help could be provided in a way the student could cooperate with, instead of just studying.

Growth mindset can help students grow in many ways as they learn their potential in learning. Schwartz mentions Infei Chen as she has found that new research that “Intelligence is Not Fixed” and when students learn this they are more likely to succeed. Pattnayak would agree that letting students fail will end up giving students better mental stability. Pattanayak says, “This understanding of writing is rooted called current traditional rhetoric, which focuses on a prescriptive and formulaic way of teaching writing that assumes there is only one way to write (or speak) something for it to be correct.” (Pattanayak, pg.82) This quote can be used to back up Schwartz method of learning as she believes that being perfect is not a reality.

Pattnayak would agree that letting students fail will end up giving students better mental stability. Pattanayak says, “This understanding of writing is rooted called current traditional rhetoric, which focuses on a prescriptive and formulaic way of teaching writing that assumes there is only one way to write (or speak) something for it to be correct.” (Pattanayak, pg.82) This quote can be used to back up Schwartz method of learning as she believes that being perfect is not a reality. The experiment that shows an example of this method. Which was orchestrated by Maricela Montoy-Wilson when teaching the students this new method she says “Everyone is going to feel stuck,” The students need to use different muscles of their brains to figure it out but it also makes them feel like they are putting in the work to get the answer. Pattanayak speaks more about how foreigners are taught to speak differently because the way the way they speak is wrong. But this new method of productive failure will give people a new perspective of what is write or wrong. Schwartz whole point of this new method is to show its not always about being correct but instead of a person trying because sometimes the reward is the amount of effort you put in.

Schwartz talks about how Maricela Montoy-Wilson asks her students to ask for specific types of help. This will help students start asking questions in class, but to also not be shy about not knowing the answer. Which is what pattanayak insinuates that this is a good idea as this gives students the benefit of doubt to be wrong instead of the student fearing being wrong. Pattanayak would agree with this since the foreign students were always taught to be perfect by using this method at a young age does not make a student be afraid to fail sometimes. This can encourage doing better and more improvement. If this is not done the students will be to scared and will start cheating just to be perfect. Learning this method young can make the mind more expanded, Pattanayak and Shwartz both have this understanding that children can be taught by their failures.

Citations

Schwartz, Katrina. “Growth Mindset: How to Normalize Mistake Making and Struggle in Class” KQED, 24 Aug. 2015.

Pattanayak, A. (2017). THERE IS ONE CORRECT WAY OF WRITING AND SPEAKING. In C. E. Ball & D. M. Loewe (Eds.), Bad Ideas About Writing (pp. 82–98). essay, West Virginia University Libraries Digital Publishing Institute

Chen, Ingfei. “New Research: Students Benefit from Learning That Intelligence Is Not Fixed.” KQED, Ingfei Chen, 16 July 2014, https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/36603/new-research-students-benefit-from-learning-that-intelligence-is-not-fixed

“Give Work That Encourages Mistakes: See It in Action, Celebrate Mistakes.” Mindset Kit, https://www.mindsetkit.org/topics/celebrate-mistakes/give-work-encourages-mistakes-see-action

“Praising the Process: See It in Action, Praise the Process, Not the Person.” Mindset Kit, https://www.mindsetkit.org/topics/praise-process-not-person/praising-process-see-action

Nowadays, reading and writing play an essential role in communication and educational success. People often believe the idea that reading and writing are not connected, but the question is if that opinion is correct or not? In the “Reading and Writing Are not connected” essay from “Bad Ideas About Writing” book, Ellen C. Carillo takes the time to address why this is a bad idea and what she believes is a more appropriate idea for students to gain in-depth and comprehensive literacy skills. She works to prove that the connection between reading and writing is inarguable by explaining how good the result of teaching writing and reading simultaneously, compared to the old problematic separation’ cause.

Books are infinity sources of humanity knowledge

It’s hard to realize that the way we read and write is not the same but they improve each other through this difference. That’s the reason why educators and instructors need appropriate strategies in teaching writing and reading. In Carillo’s chapter of “Bad Ideas About Writing”, she explicates her perspective about the importance of teaching writing and reading alongside each other in many ways. One of the most notable is when she emphasizes the idea that reading and writing are not two separate skills: “What is often neglected in these public debates about the best way to teach literacy at the college level is that reading and writing are connected practices and, as such, the best way to teach them is together. It is a bad idea to continue privileging writing at the expense of reading” (Carillo 38). Carillo further explains that: “… research has shown that students learn to read and write better when they are instructed in both simultaneously. This is reinforced when children practice both reading and writing the same words” (Carillo 38-39). This one more time affirms Carillo’s idea that reading and writing are connected through the learning process and they have a close relationship.

Although this problematic separation is eliminated, the journey to earn that achievement is not easy. It took educators and curricula developers decades to figure out that children can learn how to read and write alongside each other in their early school years. Students are usually taught to read articles, books or essays then write feedback about feeling or understanding content and theme of reading materials. In this way, students can be flexible in thinking and expressing ideas not only in academics but also in social situations. Carillo explains that:” When one writes, one is creating meaning by putting words and ideas together. When one reads, the same thing happening” (Carillo 40). What she’s identifying is the supports for the idea that writing and reading have a close relationship, they support each other when teaching them alongside together. Besides, both reading and writing sharpen students’ mental ability while putting words and ideas together which helps them become better thinkers. Especially in college-level classrooms, reading and writing should be taught alongside each other than any elsewhere. College students can be fully aware of genres or types of books then read them collectively. They connect their own life experiences with the content of the sources they read to create their unique outcome, which can be considered valuable material to be a good writer. Carillo states in her essay:” Few people might read the same novel but each takes something different from it. That personal transaction with the text has affected how each reader creates meaning.” (Carillo 40). In other words, reading helps students to have their perspective about something that makes them different from others and day by day widen their writing sources.

“Writer” by Nattakorn Maneerat. Unsplash

Along with Carillo, many scholars support the idea of teaching reading and writing simultaneously. Author of “Reading, Writing, and Learning in Classroom”, David Bloome states that “Reading is typically viewed as used for gaining information. One reads a book to gain information to do so” (Bloom 23). Indeed, reading is always the most effective way to collect information. There are so many sources that we can not count, and every source has its value to contribute to human knowledge’s “warehouse”. As a certain thing, a good writer is always one who read a lot of information before they sit down and start writing.

Michael Bunn an author of “Motivation and Connection: Teaching Reading (and Writing) in the composition classroom” uses his writing to look at the close relationship of reading and writing and how important they are to student’s success. He states in his article:” Teaching reading in terms of its connections to writing can motivate students to read and increase the likelihood that they find success in both activities. It can lead students to value reading as an integral aspect of learning to write. It can help students develop their understanding of writerly strategies and techniques. Most of us firmly believe that reading improves writing.” (Bunn 512) This is one of the conclusions Bunn has after finishing his survey about the connection between reading and writing. He explains that if students know what the purpose of their reading is about, they will be motivated and take the reading process effective as a joyful activity hence improving writing’s outcome. Most important, he asserts the value of teaching writing and reading alongside together, which can improve each other day by day.

In short, all three authors have come together to a common idea about the essence of teaching reading and writing at the same time. Nowadays, strong communication skills are a priority in many corporate recruitments, in this case, communication is identified by reading and writing skills. Therefore, students should practice both reading and writing regularly and simultaneously, to enhance communication skills as well as critical thinking.

Work Cited

Ellen C. Carillo. “Reading and Writing Are Not Connected.”  | in Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe. Bad Ideas About Writing. West Virginia University Library, Digital publishing Institute, Morgan Town, WV.PDF. https://textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf

Bunn, M. (2013). Motivation and Connection: Teaching Reading (and Writing) in the Composition Classroom. College Composition and Communication, 64(3), 496–516. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43490768

Bloome, D., & Theodorou, E. (1985). Reading, Writing, and Learning in the Classroom. Peabody Journal of Education, 62(3), 20–43. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1492584

Many people believe that failure is bad; however, the reality might not be true. For example, in the articles, “Failure is Not an Option,” included in the book Bad Ideas about Writing, and “Silicon Valley’s Culture of Failure… and the ‘walking dead’ it leaves behind” respectively, Allison D Carr and Rory Carroll assert that failure is not an option is a negative idea because of its possibility to hinder success. As an alternative view, they mention that repeated failure as an option is a better idea. They say it is a better idea because failure creates an opportunity for success.

“Never Stop” by Fab Lentz licensed under Unsplash

Image by Raul Varzar is licensed under Unsplash

To solidify their argument, both authors gave an example of how repeated failure often leads to success. For instance, Carr gives examples of successful writers as her evidence, such as renowned journalist and public intellectual Ta-Nehisi Coates, Pulitzer Prize-winning novelist Junot Díaz, and Nobel prize winner for literature William Faulkner, whom all have testified that they failed many times as a writer to create good writing (Carr 78). This explains that to create good writing there is a process that may be filled with massive failure. Carr uses this evidence to show that success comes from one having the “mindset trained from failure”(Carr 76).

“Tesla Mobile 3D Wallpaper” by Alexander Shatov, licensed by Unsplash

Carroll in agreement with Carr provides additional evidence. In his article, Carroll said, “Failure is not only invoked, but celebrated [in Silicon Valley]. Entrepreneurs give speeches detailing their misfires. Academics laud the virtue of making mistakes. . . While the rest of the world recoils at failure, in other words, technology’s dynamic innovators enshrine it as a rite of passage en route to success” (Carroll). Carroll meant that in places where innovation is rewarded, Silicon Valley sees failure not as a mistake, but rather as a path for an opportunity. It is this culture of failure that makes Silicon Valley a successful place.

In addition, Carr mentions another evidence: “. . .  [We] use and benefit daily from innovations discovered by accident: penicillin, Corn Flakes, Post-it Notes, Corning ware, WD-40, oral contraception, and potato chips. All of these were discovered when the discoverer was working on a different puzzle” (Carr 77). This means that innovation is created by making a lot of attempts. It’s interesting that many of the things which one values today are made accidentally. Instead of valuing and expecting perfection, one should respect the reality that failure can be the way to success.

“A tornado rip” by Mick Haupt is licensed under Unsplash.

“The Tik Tok app” by Nik is licensed under Unsplash.

In support of Carr’s evidence, Carroll asserts the idea that failure is a path to success. He said the success, or the overnight success called by many people, comes from struggling, which is the result of repeated failure. Carroll believes it is this struggle or failure that paves the road to success. For example, He mentions, the company Airbnb, which started with two guys who struggled on their way but now have a billion-dollar company. Carroll provides Airbnb as his evidence to show how their failure (Struggle) opened the door for success while showing that the ones who stopped after one failure still fail. To explain further Carroll writes, “Most startups fail. However, many entrepreneurs still overestimate the chances of success – and the cost of failure” (Carroll). Carroll meant that even if there is a huge failure in Silicon Valley, they still know they will succeed after a repeated failure. Now, most entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley, even with most start-up businesses failing, have a dream to run their own company.

“Wave of glass and steel” by Etienne Boulanger is licensed under Unsplash

In conclusion, authors Allison D. Carr and Rory Carroll gather to inform an idea which is a better idea about failure. They conveyed that repeated failure does not hinder success, but rather provides the foundation of it. From this point, it is clear that writers should understand that creating good writing is not a linear process, but rather a recursive process. As a result, they should see their rough drafts as an opportunity to improve their paper.

                                               Works Cited                                                      

Carr, Allison. “Failure is Not an Option.” Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E. Ball  & Drew M. Loewe, West Virginia University Libraries, 2017, pp. 76-81.

Carroll, Rory. “Silicon Valley’s culture of failure… and ‘the walking dead’ it leaves behind.” The Guardian. 28 June  2014.www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/28/silicon-valley-startup-failure-culture-success-myth.

The bad idea is that some people are born good writers, the author’s Jill Parrott and David Bartholomae present what they think a better idea is: to become a better writer, one must build skills, adapt, and have the persistence to improve. The author Jill Parrott addresses this bad idea, in the book Bad Ideas About Writing, by explaining that there are numerous ways writers can improve their writing and not be discouraged about it. David Bartholomae also addresses this bad idea in his article “Inventing the University” fixating on how students need to learn the conventions of writing to make their writing clear and understandable for the audience.

Graham, Scott. (2015). Man writing on paper- Vivid 2015. 2015 Photography by Scott Graham

In Parrott’s article “Some People Are Born Good Writers,” she explains her reasoning behind writers being made and not born in many ways. One of the most significant is that “Persistence emphasizes that experience is more powerful than unchangeable ability, and challenges help move writers forward rather than delaying their progress.” (Parrott 73). Here she is stating that for one to improve their writing, being persistent is the key. By putting in the work, constantly going overwork, and trying to improve will help the writer know what mistakes not to make in the future. The more practice they put in the better outcome they will have in their work. They also must be able to take past mistakes made in their work, whether good or bad, and build on them to keep improving. The more practice the writer puts in, the more improved progress they will see in their future work. When writers continue to be persistent, they start to build habits and a writing process making changes to it depending on if the process is helping them or needs improvement. To stray from the bad idea that “Some People Are Born Good Writers” writers must build a process that helps them best.

p_ponomareva. (2017). Sad and tired pre-teen schoolboy sitting in stress- Vivid 2017. 2017 Photography by p_ponomareva.

          When the author David Bartholomae states that college students need to start “Inventing the University” he suggests that when in an academic setting students need to adapt to speaking and writing a certain way and if they cannot adapt, they should pretend. Meaning if they wish to become a scholar and converse with other scholars that they must copy them until it becomes natural to them. Some students find it hard to develop new ways of speaking and writing in an academic setting. Bartholomae states that “These students have to appropriate (or be appropriated by) a specialized discourse, and they have to do this as though they were easily and comfortably one with their audience…”. (Bartholomae 4). He explains that students write for their professors when in fact students must understand that their professor is part of the audience they are writing for. When students are beginner writers or even after they have been writing for some time being able to learn who the audience is and what background or discourse, they come from is important. This helps them so when they are writing about a subject, they’re able to make connections to the audience and help them understand the topic and where the audience is coming from. Knowing this will help improve a writer’s work and have fewer mistakes.

In conclusion, the bad idea “Some People Are Born Good Writers” shouldn’t stop inexperienced writers from writing or attempting to improve their writing skills. Those who stick to the mindset of some people are just born good writers will only be discouraged from improving their work. Inexperienced writers who want to become better writers, such as new coming college students, should always seek improvements. By adapting, building writing skills, and being persistent to improve their writing will help them in staying away from this mindset. Being persistent is only part of being a good writer but figuring out a process that will help them in writing and knowing where the audience is coming from will help with the struggle of becoming a better writer. Also knowing when to voice their thoughts and feelings to catch the reader’s attention makes them more interested in their essay. Doing these things will help improve a writer’s work and aim to be an even greater writer one day. As stated by Parrott in her essay “Good writers are not born. They are learned” (Parrot 74).

Works Cited

• Ball, E. Cheryl; Loewe, M. Drew. Bad Ideas About Writing. Parrott, Jill. “Some People Are Just Born Good Writers”. Pp. 71-75
• Bartholomae, David. “Inventing The University”. Pp 4-23

As first-year students make their way through college, they become exposed to new writing formats, processes, tips, and criteria. Through learning college writing skills, they begin to formulate their own ideas about what a true writer is. The bad idea that’ll be of particular focus is stated in the title of authors Dustin Edwards and Enrique Paz’s essay: “Only Geniuses Can Be Writers” in the book “Bad Ideas About Writing”. In their essay, Edwards and Paz shed light on the very well-known yet inaccurate idea that all good writers are unsociable and can write original, inspiring masterpieces with ease. They argue that this faulty idea is severely detrimental to neophyte writers and, in truth, never existed. A better idea would be that good writers cooperate to help each other compose new and better writing of their own using old ideas.

“Designer Sketching Wireframes” by Green Chameleon. Unsplash.

To come to this conclusion, the authors take a historical approach to the idea, exploring the meaning of genius authorship throughout history. They discovered that due to the expansion of readers in the 18th century, people started wanting to make a living off of their written work. Because of this demand, certain standards had to be developed to determine what a genius writer was. Namely, their ability to create rather than just write. Edwards and Paz state that “They claimed that true authors are not inspired by the outside world; they are inspired by their [own] unique selves.” (Edwards and Paz 66). To rephrase, “true” authors were required to have completely original work. If any cooperation or assistance had taken place, the quality of the writing decreased substantially. Genius writing had to be wholly by that author; inspired writing was heavily critiqued.

Consequently, upcoming authors in the 18th century struggled to succeed because of such unrealistic standards. To counter the originality-preaching argument, Edwards and Paz reason that “An even deeper [look into] history reveals a more esteemed regard for imitation”(Edwards and Paz 67). The authors assert that educational collaboration was widely practiced in ancient cultures. People would learn skills from one another, recycling old ideas to come up with even better ones. This kind of writing is what Edwards and Paz argue should be restored.

“Teamwork Makes the Dream Work” by Dylan Gillis. Unsplash.

One of the most pivotal sources that the authors include in their essay is Martha Woodmansee’s article “The Genius and the Copyright: Economic and Legal Conditions of the Emergence of the ‘Author’”. In her writing, Woodmansee aims to dismantle the historical notion that an author’s work must be entirely original. Her main argument is that the value of writing shouldn’t be solely based on its innovativeness. Instead, it should be based on the value of the entire new perspectives that they’ve accumulated from another writer’s idea(s). Throughout her article, Woodmansee mainly focuses on how the definition of an author evolved through the Renaissance period. One example she gives illustrates that the author was known to only receive his inspiration from within himself. Woodmansee claims that “Inspiration came to be explicated in terms of [the] original genius…”(Woodmansee 427). During the Renaissance, the attribute that seemingly defined an author was how ingenious he was, and “genius” in that era was defined as originality. Although this rule complicated things for writers, it made the lives of publishers and editors far easier. Woodmansee introduces both conflicting viewpoints about this idea. The economically logical argument: originality and creation, versus the author’s argument: growth and collaboration. However, people ultimately prioritized the freshness and originality of a piece of writing, and the opposing side received little attention. After reading Woodmansee’s article and Edwards and Paz’s essay, one begins to notice how their subject matters begin to align. Because all three authors took more of a historical approach to support their similar arguments, their ideas integrated smoothly.

               Taken by Louis Hansel. Unsplash.

 In conclusion, Dustin Edwards, Enrique Paz, and Martha Woodmansee collaborated to present a better idea and potentially eradicate a bad idea; to deliver a potential solution to an existing problem. Together, the authors introduce a better idea about writers: they collaborate to help each other create their own ideas from someone else’s. Discovering the “better idea” using different authors demonstrates the power of combined efforts, and the potential answers it could reveal. One couldn’t help but wonder, how many other unresolved questions can be cleared up with a collaboration? How impactful can academic teamwork be?

Works Cited

Edwards, Dustin and Paz, Enrique. “Only Geniuses Can Be Writers,” in Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, 64-70. Web

Woodmansee, Martha. “The Genius and the Copyright: Economical and Legal Conditions of the Emergence of the ‘Author’.” Eighteenth-Century Studies, vol. 17, no. 4, 1984, pp. 425-448. JSTOR    

“Writer” by Hannah Ollinger. Unsplash

While writers seem to have a good perception of what’s good or bad writing for them, it was not always like that. One might think that writers know how to write good in the first place, however they too struggled to get to the point to where they are now. It does not matter if someone is a writer or not, at some point in their life people will write essays, research papers, poems, and other writings that they have to know for who and what they are writing for to reach a certain point.

There are many ideas about writing that in the book, Bad Ideas about Writing author Elizabeth Wardle mentions one misconception about how no one can learn to write in general. The title of her essay, in which she opposes the idea is “You Can Learn to Write in General.” 

“Audience” by Alexandre Pellaes. Unsplash

In other words, Elizabeth is trying to prove that writing is not general by explaining that writing is very broad meaning that there are various types of writing that one can write. However, each writing has a different purpose to reach a certain audience. In letting the idea go that writing is easy, Wardle tells the use of writing is to improve. In order to grow as a writer, Wardle suggests that the better idea is to give time and effort to engage in several types of writing so we can learn. 

Usually when we write, we mostly think about how one should write or structure the paper. A scenario Elizabeth Wardle uses is imagining writing with nothing in mind, which she claims that we cannot do it as writing has a certain purpose (Wardle 30). In order to write one must know what includes in writing, in which Elizabeth implies, “This is because context, audience, purpose, medium, history, and values of the community all impact what writing is and needs to be in each situation” (Wardle 30). If we put all these requirements into our paper, then we have a clear idea what our paper is supposed to be but no. The situation is what type of writing are we supposed to use to in order to reach a goal, claim or purpose in that writing. In figuring out what specific writing we will be writing, then we can apply those other skills or elements we will be using to support and define what the writer is trying to say.  

“Learning” by NeONBRAND. Unsplash.

Despite knowing the different types of writing we should use, do not expect writing will be easy just because we know what each writing is for. Elizabeth Wardle states, “A better notion of how writing works is one that recognizes that after learning scribal skills (letters, basic grammatical constructions), everything a writer does is impacted by the situation in which she is writing” (Wardle 31). Even though we are applying many concepts into writing, it does not mean each writing will involve all the same elements. There are many types of writing that not all elements will be included in the writing, which makes it difficult for people to have their own writing style. In thinking that every writing is just the same is wrong as Elizabeth argues that writing is all about learning and finding new experiences so one can explore many types of writing.  

In knowing that each writing is not the same, Elizabeth provides the idea of improving one’s writing based on the article Elon Statement on Writing Transfer. In the article, Elon University researchers correlate transfer and writing by stating “Writers consistently draw on prior knowledge in order to navigate within and among various contexts for writing and learning” (Elon University). By practicing and taking advantage of what one knew before and applying old and new skills into writing can help establish a good paper. Not only that, as the skills are set to prepare people to build up their own knowledge and communication in their writing using metacognition (Elon University). In setting forth the idea of experiencing new things will help the mind learn more about writing.  

“Skills” by UX Indonesia. Unsplash.

Overall, in order to improve one’s writing, one must know that writing is not in general. Elizabeth Wardle repeatedly says each writing has a unique way of setting for their purpose. In talking about transfer, Wardle, and Elon University sets that there are many skills in order to focus and consider trying to use it in our writing. This is what makes a good writer; we must experience and learn what writing is supposed to be and how it is written in various kinds of writing. 

Works Cited 

Wardle, Elizabeth “You Can Learn to Write in General” Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, West Virginia University Libraries, 2017, pgs. 30-33 

“Elon Statement on Writing Transfer.” Center for Engaged Learning, May 22, 2014. https://www.centerforengagedlearning.org/elon-statement-on-writing-transfer/