Reading and writing are so closely connected, yet most students aren’t given the opportunity to gain reading skills that can improve their writing. This creates students who struggle with writing because they fail to learn how to read for context, tone, audience, and digging deeper into what the author is saying. Julie Myatt Barger wrote the essay, “Reading is not Essential to Writing Instruction,” where she introduces the bad idea a lot of English instructors make of not realizing the importance of teaching effective reading skills to improve students writing. In “Reading Practices in the Writing Classroom,” Linda Adler-Kassner and Heidi Estrem explain some strategies for teachers to improve students’ reading comprehension and set them up to succeed in writing through learning productive reading skills. The authors of both of these essays agree that English instructors, specifically in high school, do not teach students how to look for complex ideas and look further into readings. The authors suggest ways of aiding students with reading comprehension so that they are able to thrive in college and their work life. 

“books” by whereisyourmind is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Julie Myatt Barger, the author of “Reading is not Essential to Writing Instruction,” exposes why teachers aren’t challenging their students to look into the context of readings and analyze what the author is saying. Many states have standardized testing that focuses more on grammar and short passage comprehension rather than deeper connections and context within texts. “As teachers understandably grew fearful about losing their jobs because of low test scores, they devoted class time to preparing students for the tests rather than developing practices that would have helped students improve as readers and writers.” (Barger 44) Barger refers to these widespread tests as a cause for teachers to sacrifice teaching strategies that could improve students reading so that they can make connections between what the authors are saying and their own experiences.

English programs in high school and college rely on studies and practices conducted decades ago. Many college English professors have studied English writing for so long, they explain the main ideas without letting students have the freedom to learn how to find the main ideas and make connections with the reading. Instead of spoon-feeding the information to students, teachers should encourage students to look beyond the text into what the author is pointing to. “Every activity [in your class] should help students move toward entering into a dialogue with the reading/s in their writing.” (Adler-Kassner, Estrem 37) Here, the authors, Linda Adler-Kassner and Heidi Estrem, describe what the goal of reading in the classroom should aim to be. High school students too often assume they are poor readers because of the limited strategies they’ve been taught, which leads them to believe they are lousy writers as well. “Analyzing texts not for meaning as one would in a literature class but rather to determine how and why the texts were constructed…” (Barger 48) Julie Barger suggests here what English teachers’ objectives should be for their students’ reading comprehension. She encourages students to look beyond the text to figure out the audience of the reading, and what the author’s purpose is among other things.

As students get to college and take an English Composition class, as often is required no matter their major, they often ask themselves why the teacher won’t just tell them exactly what to write as teachers usually do in high school. Writers think of themselves as inadequate when getting to college because their previous reading skills are no longer useful, and they wonder why they aren’t succeeding in their English class when the class is meant for beginners. The strategies that create good writers out of practically anyone are ones that: “use writing and discussion to work through and interpret complex ideas from readings and other texts.” (Adler-Kassner, Estrem 37) The authors, Adler-Kassner and Estrem, describe the connection between reading and writing and how impactful better reading can be for students’ writings. When students start learning these beneficial reading practices, there is a positive shift in their writing and writing process. The bad idea that reading is not essential to writing instruction is one that should be addressed before students get to college and teachers ought to implement more efficient strategies so that students are able to succeed in their academics as well as their work later in life.

Bibliography

Adler-Kassner, Linda and Estrem, Heidi. (2007). “Reading Practices in the Writing Classroom”. WPA: Writing Program Administration, p35-47.

Barger, M. Julie. “Reading is not Essential to Writing Instruction.” Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, Bad Ideas About Writing, Digital Publishing Institute: West Virginia University Libraries, 2017, textbooks.lib.wvu.edu. p44-50.

In this text, I will be discussing Jennifer M. Cunnigham’s essay “African-American Language is Not Good English”. According to Cunningham, saying that the African American language is not good English is a bad idea because Cunningham believes that African American Language is not good nor bad English since it is technically not English. Both Cunningham and one of her sources written by Lisa Green stipulate that African American English is just another language some people have learned to speak. For example, they both know that there are different structures people use to speak. One grammatical construction being zero copula, which is the use of eliminating certain verbs. The elimination of some verbs makes African American English what it is and the pronunciation of words. 

In “African-American Language is Not Good English” Cunningham talks about several reasons and gives a lot of information as to why people should not say AAE is not good English. She argues that AAL is another form of dialect for other people. Some people think it is not good English because they are not used to it and are used to Standard American English’s structure. According to Cunningham, she states that “teachers, in particular, are more likely to correct errors related to African American Language, which is why teachers, professionals” (Cunningham 88). This shows how quick teachers are to dismiss something they are not used to. Instead of ignoring the dialect of AAE, they should learn and take time to see that AAL is different from Standard American English and not a flawed form of it. Cunningham also states, “Within the classroom or in a professional setting, these so-called errors need to be addressed in terms of language difference, code-switching, and expected conventions rather than a person’s misuse of English.” (Cunningham 88). By saying this, Cunningham indicates that the difference between AAE and SAE should not have one seem better than the other. The structure difference of AAE and SAE should not be enough to say one is wrong and one is right. Correct English is not limited to Standard American English. In “African American English: A Linguistic Introduction” by Lisa Green it informs us on the structure, origins, and grammar  of AAL. According to Green there are grammatical and phonological rules for writing and speaking AAE. Green states, “Words in AAE and general American English that have the same meanings may have different pronunciations due to constraints on sounds.” (Green). This shows that there is a different pronunciation to things and some people may be confused by that. It does not make it bad English if somebody cannot simply understand somebody else. An example Green gives is, “AAE the “th” sound in general American English (and other varieties of English) bath is produced as “f” (i.e.,baf), and the “th “sound in general American English bathe is produced as “v” (i.e.,bav).” (Green). These few changes to words lead to confusion with people who are used to SAE or leads them to think one is not as well educated as them.

With these two sources, we can see that African American Language is just another language. Both writers believe that both SAE and AAL are valid. The way someone speaks should not be based on SAE. There are many different languages and structures of languages in the world, and AAL happens to be one of them. From my perspective, I agree with Jennifer M. Cunningham’s argument for a few reasons. First, I have been in situations where people say the way I talk is incorrect English or I am not using the correct grammar. Growing up in the south is different and the dialects spoken in those areas are way different than what people think is correct, such as Standard American English. Just like Spanish, their structure of sentences is completely different from the SAE structure of sentences. With AAL there is the elimination of certain verbs. For example, in AAL people would say, “She driving”. While in SAE they would say “She is driving”. I believe that teachers should be taught about AAL to better understand students that tend to speak AAE. Later in life, I had to learn that the way I had spoken was not accepted in writing and speaking. It made people think I was not as well educated as others. I learned to speak “properly” to be able to pass and learned how to turn it on and off. This shows us how close-minded society is and that many people think about what they have learned in life is the only right way. My suggestion to try and fix this problem is to have teachers and professors learn how the AAL is spoken and the differences between AAE and SAE. 

Work Cited

1. Cunningham, Jennifer M. “2.7: African American Language Is Not Good English.” Humanities LibreTexts, Libretexts, 7 Aug. 2020, human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Composition/Specialized_Composition/Book:_Bad_Ideas_About_Writing_(Ball_and_Loewe)/02:_Bad_Ideas_About_Who_Good_Writers_are_…/2.07:_African_American_Language_is_not_Good_English.
2. Green, Lisa J. African American English : A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 2002. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=e000xna&AN=125093&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

In the beginning, grammar was taught thru worksheets and exercises, but they do not work. As discussed in Bad Ideas About Writing: Teaching Grammar Improves Writing by Patricia Dunn, the old school way does not work. We must find a better way to teach grammar because it is necessary in communication and writing. The educational system has studied and studied this, and they know it does not work but they have not changed the curriculum. In the study’s, it was proven the way grammar is currently taught actually ruins the students writing. IT RUINS WRITING! Why hasn’t it been updated?  We are teaching this badly by making students do worksheets. The better way to teach grammar would be to have students write. I know they will hate it, but it is proven to be a better way to teach grammar. Writing is better cause it teaches you how to use grammar in real world situations.

As proven in many studies before, teaching grammar thru worksheets and exercises ruins writing. One way that has been proven to help students learn grammar is writing. However, we do not mean just make them write about the same thing over and over and hope it improves. That would not work. ‘The studies focus on all students not just those who display writing difficulties. (Writing Next, pg. 3) The way to how them improve is to make them about various real-world situations. They will master being able to adjust to any writing situation. Mastering writing in any situation will improve them in a lot of aspects. Later in life when they start a career there will be no surprises if they are given an assignment. Most high schoolers say that there writing class did not prepare them for college writing.  In college, they are playing catch up trying quickly to learn and upgrade their skills. If they had learned to adjust in high school, they would not have to cramp to get it right which would make the art of the work worst because they are basically reteaching themselves. The importance of learning to adjust is one of the back bones of writing and grammar. Curriculum should include writing strategies, summarization, collaborative writing, specific product goals, word processing, sentence combining, prewriting, inquiry activities, writing approach, study of models, and writing for content learning. (Writing Next, pg. 4-5) Al these skills will affectively help with grammar. Grammar can we have taken on many ways, but there is a formal way to incorporate it. If you cannot master how to adjust and incorporate grammar properly, your writing will not elevate. The key is learning to balance the two and being able to establish a consistent understanding on how to use them effortlessly.

In conclusion, there is a very easy and proven affective way to change the way students learn grammar. Writing in different scenarios is the best way for students to follow through in the long run. In aspects of career and life. Adjusting should be effortless and consistent. No one should be shocked or misunderstood if they are well-rounded. Quit ruining writing. Writing is the basis for communication if we are unable to communicate, life fails. Teachers should take some time to see which would work best for there classes (Teaching Grammar… pg. 147). In the end it is worth it cause down the line the student could think back 5 years and realized they are prepared for whatever with no sweat. They more prepared we leave our next generation the better the world will be in the future. In general, it’s our lives at stake. We must make sure it is learned because to the young generation it’s not a needed. 

Dunn, P. (2017). TEACHING GRAMMAR IMPROVES WRITING [Web log post]. Retrieved 2020, from https://textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf

Graham, S. & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools (Carnegie Corporation Report). Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Retrieved September 7, 2007, from http://www.all4ed.org/publications/WritingNext/WritingNext.pdf

Writing is a constant skill. Every time a person sits down to write anything, be it for work, or school, or out of personal passion, the skill of writing is being developed. Thus, with the constant development of writing, there exists as well constant unwritten guidelines that are being followed as well. For example, when writing, the writer always has a certain audience in mind, be it a schoolteacher, a boss, a family member, or just a friend. Even writing in a personal journal, away from others’ eyes, has the author themselves as an audience. Even now, this is being written with an academic audience in mind. Thus, the idea that it is possible to write in general is not only a destructive idea, it is just plain wrong. All writing is specialized, tailored to its specific audience.  Works of fiction may bend or break writing conventions in order to make the reader feel a certain way while reading, such as the way Roald Dahl went about making up words and playing with sentence structure, while academic works strictly adhere to the rules of grammar. With an audience in mind, the way a person writes is influenced from the very beginning.

Because there is no such thing as writing in general, all writing must be tailored to each individual situation, not merely an audience. Works of fiction can simply make situations up, but a work of non-fiction must be well-researched, accurate, and cited properly. It’s important to remember this because writing is not merely about the audience, but the intent of what the author is trying to push. Trying to structure a work of fiction while following the rules of writing an essay will not work, likewise, writing an essay while treating it like a piece of fiction will not work either. Thus, it is important in every writing situation to take a step to first consider why one is writing, what the intended audience is, and what one is trying to accomplish. These seem like common knowledge, but they are important building blocks for any writing exercise. Like a building on soft ground cannot stand without a proper foundation, any work of writing cannot stand without an understanding of what it is trying to accomplish. Therefore, sitting down and simply trying to write something people will like without understanding the audience is doomed to end in failure. It is as the old saying goes: “If you make something for everyone, you make something for no-one.”

This is why the idea of writing in general is, as Elizabeth Wardle says in her essay You Can Learn to Write in General, a “dangerous idea that needs to die (Wardle, 31).” It breeds the misconception that one technique of doing something can be applied to everything, which it cannot, like attempting to use a hammer as a screwdriver. The techniques for writing are specialized for different situations, no one technique can be broadly applied to all forms of writing.

This means that, instead of the question being “how can I write in general?” The question should instead be “what techniques can I learn to help me better write in certain situations?” The first step, naturally, is recognizing that every situation is expectant of different standards of quality. For example, the authors of the book Worlds Apart: Acting and Writing in Academic and Workplace Contexts make the example that when a professor grades and adds comments to an essay, those comments are typically used to justify the docking or addition of points to that grade, rather than criticisms and reworking that would be used in the workplace (Dias et al., 226). While techniques like this are used for similar purposes, it is important to remember that the contexts in which they are used are vastly different. Likewise, a deliberate stylistic choice in one work of writing such as a quote has one meaning in fiction, showing the character in the act of speaking, a quotation in an academic work implies that the ideas the author is pulling is not their own. Thus, while one work may get away without having to cite for quotations, the other work cannot.

Therefore, it is important to remember this: Writing in general does not and potentially cannot exist. What does exist however, is the ability to tool certain conventions of writing to different purposes. However, no one device can be used for all avenues of writing. Thus, it is the responsibility of the author to keep in mind who they are writing for, what they are trying to accomplish, and then choose the strategies and devices that work best for the particular situation. With that in mind, while it may not be possible to write in general, it is possible to draw on the experience one has had in writing and make the best educated guess on what works for the situation at hand. While it may not result in a perfect work, it will result in a work that is best tooled for the subject matter and audience.

Works Cited

Wardle, Elizabeth. “You Can Learn to Write in General.” Ball, Cheryl E. and Drew M. Loewe. Bad Ideas About Writing. 2017. 30-33. Document.

Par‚, A., Medway, P., Freedman, A., & Dias, P. (2013). Worlds Apart: Acting and Writing in Academic and Workplace Contexts. New York, NY: Routledge.

Today, when students hear the words “First Year Composition” they dread the thought of having to write endless papers and feel as if the class will be a waste of their time. A lot of the time it is because they have been taught improperly or they are confused on the actual concept of what a “First Year Composition” class is. Rumors will go around to students that they can skip the class, or that it will not be worth their time. “First Year Composition Should be Skipped” by Paul G. Cook and “Virtuous Arguments” by John Duffy are great reads on why taking FYC(First Year Composition) is a necessary learning bridge for not only your college career, but for other classes ahead. Little do students know that this class will teach you the correct way to argue, using proper wording in essays, and even learning to read the tone of writing.

When students think of having to deal with life experiences, their first thought is not on learning how to deal with them on paper. What students fail to realize is that FYC is where you first learn how to read voices, ideas, moods, circumstances, and the rhythm of words on paper. (Paul G. Cook Page 25) Students are always eager to get to the end result, meanwhile they forget that the classes that they feel are insignificant can change their perspective on everything moving forward in the future. Which comes down to FYC’s amazing point of learning rhetoric.

FYC teaches students the important writing skill of rhetoric. Rhetoric is learning how to use words, gestures, and symbols in writing to properly convey the message to the reader. (Paul G. Cook 25) Students often feel that using rhetoric is common sense until they reread what they have written and realize nothing is making since. To use rhetoric is to look or hear words and be able to form a proper opinion. A good example of where rhetoric is found in the news. News anchors are constantly fighting back and forth, but are always able to have counter arguments to things that are said to them.

John Duffy states in his article “Virtuous Arguments” that FYC is where students first learn to make and support a claim, while also considering alternatives to their argument. Meaning that when many first-year students write, they are often unknowledgeable on how to convey their argument properly. FYC guides students on understanding the proper way to format their arguments, so that their ideas do not sound scattered throughout their papers. This in turn allows students to create a proper claim.

 FYC is also an important element for learning how to make counter arguments. It is often easy for students to make arguments, but they are not usually accustomed to taking criticism on the statements they have made. John Duffy mentioned that FYC class is the main place students learn how to take criticism in a generous manner. It is easy to get tunnel vision when students think they are right about something. If students can understand another person’s perspective on an argument, it makes it easier for them to look at the subject matter at every possible angle. This openness to other’s opinions allows students to possibly learn something new, or even make it easier for students to educate one another.  Not only does this skill pertain to writing, but it also transfers to other classes and even social discussions. The fantastic thing about FYC is that the class is tremendously smaller, making it easier for students to be confident in what they are learning.

Communication is an essential life skill that will carry students throughout not only their college career, but life as well. FYC is an important college introductory class that will teach students this ability by instructing them on how to construct an argument, form their words properly, and read tone through writing. So, the next time you hear someone talking about not taking a introductory class, look a little more into the fundamentals and what you could potentially take further into your college experience. The first time for something is usually when you learn the most in any situation.

Works Cited:

1. Duffy, John. “Virtuous Arguments.” Inside Higher Ed, 16 March 2012 https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/03/16/essay-value-first-year-writing-courses
2. Cook, G. Paul. “First-Year Composition Should Be Skipped”. Morgantown, WV. Bad Ideas About Writing. (2017). PDF. P.24-29

           As is common knowledge, every teacher has a different teaching style and prioritizes certain topics. For some English teachers, it seems extremely important to focus on a more serious style of writing. Michael Theune, the author of Excellent Academic Writing Must be Serious (pg 181-186) and Paul Lewis, the author of How Many Students Does it Take to Write a Joke (pg 59-69) argue against this style of teaching. In their eyes, teaching serious writing can actually hinder the writing process, preventing students from tapping into all of their creativity and the deeper intricacies of language.

           One might be curious as to how adding comedy can actually improve writing. It is surprising to see the vast number of reasons why employing comedy in writing can be extremely beneficial. One of the first of many advantages is the requirement to pay “close attention to language at all levels” (Theune 182). Lewis concurs with this statement, saying, “analyzing and creating jokes, even cheesy puns, calls attention to the complexity and richness of language” (Lewis 62). What people sometimes forget is how difficult it can be to weave and form a sentence that actually makes sense comedically. Comedic writers must pay close attention to the deeper intricacies of language like rhythm and sound (Theune 182), causing them to create sentences that are much more complex than we initially realize. All of their words must come together properly to form a coherent joke that people will understand. Thus, teaching students to become aware of this new level of language allows them to more carefully craft their sentences when writing using any tone, not just comedy.

(Lusina 2020)

           Another benefit to teaching comedic writing is its’ ability to change a student’s outlook on the writing process, as well as their level of motivation. For some writers, especially those in high school English classes, normal writing can become boring due to its serious tone, causing students to lose interest and motivation in writing. This can be directly compared to writing using comedy, where students might feel less constrained to the serious confines of normal writing. This deviation can allow students to tap into a “source of energy and enthusiasm [that was previously] untapped” (Lewis 60). Revitalized and motivated, those writers who previously didn’t want to write are now excited to do so. This is how large of an impact comedy can have on writing. It makes the process fun, more creative, and enjoyable. There is a different kind of excitement that runs through your body when you enjoy the activity you are doing. It seems silly to miss out on this opportunity to harness the excitement and energy and channel it into writing.

(Koppens 2018)

           Further adding to the benefits of teaching comedic writing is the fostering of creativity and new ideas. Comedy forces writers to come up with unique ways to combine words or new ideas as a whole to continue providing original content to their audience. Theune discusses this idea, saying, “humor is always attuned to the new; new possibilities; new perspectives, jazzy combinations” (Theune 183). It is extremely important to teach students ways to channel creativity in order for them to continue writing original and unique pieces. If a teacher were to teach serious writing, the pieces written by the students might remain similar throughout the entire school year; there would be no diversity in their writing. Teaching comedic writing provides students with the ability to add some spice to each and every piece in a different way. This not only makes writing more exciting for the students, but it also makes reading the pieces more enjoyable for the teacher.

           As discussed by Theune, Lewis, and many more writers, teaching comedic writing can have monumental impacts on writing. Whether it is taught by middle school teachers or college professors, any education on comedic writing techniques can help. Because of how valuable this skill is, I hope teachers begin teaching comedic writing. It will only improve the quality of writing of students, so it’d foolish to leave it completely out of a curriculum. Furthermore, I hope students see the value of applying comedic aspects in their writing. Even if teachers have comedic writing in the curriculum, it is the job of the students to pay attention to the lesson and employ the skills they learn. All that can come of it is an increase in creativity, new ideas, improved sentence structure, and much more. So why not try it?

References

Koppens, Ylanite. Pexels.com, 11 Jan. 2018, www.pexels.com/photo/person-holding-silver-retractable-pen-in-white-ruled-book-796603/.

Lusina, Anete. Pexels.com, 3 July 2020, www.pexels.com/photo/concentrated-woman-writing-notes-in-papers-in-park-4792255/.

Theune, Michael. “Excellent Academic Writing Must Be Serious.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball & Drew M. Loewe, West Virginia University Libraries Digital Publishing Institude, 2017, pp. 181-186.

Lewis, Paul. “How Many Students Does It Take to Write a Joke? Humor Writing in Composition Courses .” The Journal of the Assembly for Expanded Perspectives on Learning, edited by Alice G Brand, vol. 3, State University of New York College at Brockport, 1998, pp. 59–69.

Posted on December 7, 2020, by Sarah

Writing is one of the most important things to learn. In elementary school, we first learn the alphabet, pronounce the letter, and write it. By using these strategies, it becomes easier for children to learn how to read and write. After that, we learn different concepts of writing. We need writing for different types of things like letters, essays, and many other writing types. Elizabeth Wardle wrote, “ You Can Learn To Write In General.” It is a bad idea that makes people think that they can write in general without a specific subject. That idea is frustrating; many people like students and even teachers. There are various solutions to solve that particular problem.

“A better conception of writing is one in which we all remember (realistically) our own experiences learning to write in different situations, and then apply that memory to our expectations of what we and others are capable of achieving.” (Elizabeth Wardle. Bad Ideas About Writing. Pg. 31). The solution is that people should understand that writing, in general, is impossible and that there are different types of writings. There are various types of writing situations like essays, reports, letters, etc. That’s why people can’t write in general. If people grow that mindset, it’ll be less complicated for them to learn to write or improve their writing. I agree with what she’s saying because it exists different writing situations with a particular subject. No one can write in general, not even teachers. People should know and understand the concept of writing the author is talking about. It is a better idea. Another author Elbow Peter talks about a solution. “Writing is a two-step process. First, you figure out your meaning, and then you put it into language.” (Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers.).  The author is saying that there is an easy process that can help people to write. First, they should think about what they want to write about and its meaning,  then start writing. That solution can help people believe that writing, in general, is not possible and that an author should plan his writing and think about what they want to write about. We should comprehend the writing process, understand the writing steps. It will be easier for the writer to improve its writing and know that we can’t write in general.

Many people think that students learn the write in general, which is not possible. We can learn about the different concepts of writing. “The idea that we can all learn to “write-in general” is not just a harmless myth. It’s a dangerous idea that needs to die because it hurts students and frustrates teachers and employers. And writers who believe it are easily discouraged because they don’t know how to learn what they need to learn in new writing situations.” (Elizabeth Wardle. Bad Ideas About Writing. Pg. 31). Elizabeth Wardle says that it is impossible to write in general, and people should be aware of that. Teachers are frustrated because they’re unable to teach their students to write in general, and students are affected by that because they may think they’re unable to learn. People always have a particular reason or subject to write. For example, when teachers ask students to do essays, they still have a subject, particularly the class they’re taking. Even at work, it’s the same situation employers write reports about specific documents. People should know and understand that writing doesn’t exist; writing is always about something. Writers should not be frustrated because it is impossible.  “But people want to believe that it’s possible to write in general because this belief makes writing seem less difficult and allows them to believe that writers can get a one-time writing inoculation that will extend across all settings.”(Elizabeth Wardle. Bad Ideas About Writing. Pg. 31). She is also saying that it makes people believe that writing in general’ myth makes it easier for people. It is not correct because considering that writing is possible makes it harder for people to write. That’s why it is a bad idea.

A better idea is to know the concepts of writing and the writing process. People should be aware of the different types of writing. As Wardle said, writing, in general, is a myth because no one can do so; papers should be organized, planned, and should have a specific idea on what it should talk about. If we understand that fact, it’ll be easier for writers to write and improve their work.

Work cited

Elbow, Peter. Writing Without Teachers, Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 1998. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/gsu/detail.action?docID=516289.

Textbooks.lib.wvu.edu. 2020. [online] Available at: <https://textbooks.lib.wvu.edu/badideas/badideasaboutwriting-book.pdf> [Accessed 5 November 2020].

Writing is an ability that requires a certain level of aptitude. However, writers are not a select group of natural-born, talented individuals. By viewing writers with this perspective, people can feel unqualified and incapable of becoming good writers. The quality of a writer’s work relies on the process of writing just as much as it does on the skill level or writing ability of the writer. Jill Parrott, the author of the essay, “Some People Are Just Born Good Writers,” believes that a particular writing talent level does not restrict people. She explains that a writer can improve their level of skill by discovering the strategies that reflect their own strengths and weaknesses. Author Jeff Goins also believes that anyone can become a good writer, as long as they have perseverance, and they are open to improvement. A writer of any level can become a good writer by dedicating time to improve their writing abilities and learning.

“Drafting a blog post on a saturday morning” by Wiertz Sébastien is licensed under CC BY 2.0

With the proper approach, confidence, and practice, any individual can achieve their writing goals and avoid a harmful mindset. Jill Parrott, the author of the essay, “Some People Are Just Born Good Writers,” discusses the issues with the concept that good writers are exclusively people who are born with superior writing skills and abilities. One of the main issues with this concept is that writers become hesitant and discouraged about their abilities. However, these attitudes are not merely a result of an individual’s lack of confidence; rather, it can be attributed to the history of writing itself. Since the late 19^th and early 20^th century, American studies focused on the product of writing instead of the process, reinforcing the concept that writing is a skill that certain individuals were just born with. As Parrott describes, “this idea that some people are good writer whiles others are not can be truly crippling to a writer” (Parrott, 74) This mindset can lead writers to have a bad attitude towards their abilities, preventing them from attempting to improve. It is imperative that writers are able to have an open mind and expand their attitudes about their work. This development process is known as metacognition, opening up mental space that allows for self-awareness and reflection. Looking back at their work, revising, and listening to feedback are all qualities that a writer should be able to do. These skills involve a certain level of humility, as opposed to being over-confident or arrogant.

While there are several qualities that pertain to a talented writer, Parrott highlights the significance of persistence as a characteristic of a good writer. She states that “persistence emphasizes that experience is more powerful than unchangeable ability, and challenges help move writers forward rather than delaying their progress” (Parrott, 73) Developing the correct mindset and remaining persistent will allow a writer to significantly improve the quality of their work by refining the writing process. Occupying additional time and effort to re-read, edit, revise, and reflect on work will eliminate errors and result in the highest quality product. In the book “Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing”, Sandra Giles says that “reflection helps you to develop your intentions (purpose), figure out your relation to your audience, uncover possible problems with your individual writing processes, set goals for revision, make decisions about language and style” (Giles)

Persistence also encourages a writer to reflect on their work to discover insight on which areas they can improve. As Jeff Goins mentions in his article “The Difference Between Good Writers & Bad Writers,” the distinctive quality between a good writer and a bad writer is the extent of commitment or perseverance towards their work. A bad writer is unmotivated and often lazy. They do not commit to improving, resulting in an inferior quality of work. Goins states that a writer should “choose to be different. Keep going when others do not. Go the extra mile that most will not take.” (Goins) Although writing depends on talent, it also heavily depends on the amount of work that a writer is willing to do. The amount of time that a writer puts into their work will reflect how good their work is.

Works Cited

Giles, Sandra L. “Reflective Writing and the Revision Process: What Were You Thinking?” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Volume 1, Parlor Press, 2010.

Goins, Jeff. “The Difference Between Good Writers and Bad Writers.” Goins, Writer, 24 Nov. 2014, goinswriter.com/the-difference-between-good-writers-and-bad-writers/.

Parrott, Jill. “Some People Are Just Born Good Writers.” Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, Bad Ideas About Writing, Digital Publishing Institute: West Virginia University Libraries, 2017, textbooks.lib.wvu.edu. p71-75