Does writing knowledge transfer easily? Ellen o carillo believes that writing knowledge transferring easily is a bad idea. she believes that educators should come up with new ways to figure how to teacher writing to promote the transfer knowledge. the curriculum must be redesigned to meet the needs of transfer knowledge and educators must be taught to do so. it does not matter how an educator teaches; they just must incorporate metacognition. metacognition Is defined as the awareness or understanding of one’s thoughts. metacognition in the classroom will allow students to think about what they are learning. the exercises taught by metacognition will give students the potential to think about what they have learned and possibly put students in a position to transfer the writing knowledge they have learned. it is actually useful to anybody transferring knowledge to any future context. there have been teachings tested that benefits the teachings for transfer. “They found that students in courses with instructors who taught for transfer did transfer their writing skills and knowledge more regularly than students who were in other types of writing courses.” this proves that the metacognition teachings is a better way of transferring the writing knowledge in students. if the studies are taken serious, colleges and university will soon see that the upbringing of the new curriculum and teachings will not keep the myth of writing knowledge transfer easily, alive.

teaching first year writers to use text is an important in transferring your writing knowledge. Douglas Downs, a professor at Montana state university, has written an article called “teaching first-year writers to use text: scholarly readings in writing-about-writing in first-year comp.” he speaks the importance of reading and understanding the text you are reading. in the first paragraph of his article he states” if we take as given that reading is embedded in communities of practice, so that making meaning of texts requires readers to construct representations of texts with reference to the activity the text is a tool in meditating…” He indicates that if students are taught to think about what they are reading, they have a better chance of being a better writer. Douglas Downs also speaks on James Sosnoski’s “hyper-reading.” hyper reading is the reading you do when you look something up on the internet. The features of hyper reading include filtering, skimming, peeking, imposing, filming, trespassing, de- authorizing, and fragmentation. these are all the short cuts of reading and you do not understand the text in which you are reading.

teaching rhetorical reading is the most grounded reading technique there is. Douglas downs teaches his students that making sense of the scholarly texts and helping them learn how to participate in the activities is what we call rhetorical reading. downs refer to what Christina Haas constructing a rhetorical frame by rhetorically moving past autonomous texts to account for many rhetorical elements. rhetorical reading points out that context simply means the activity system that a text comes from. it is easy to teach a student rules for understanding work of a scholarly. what people don’t realize is, the texts are motivated and have an agenda which is what shifts a student’s perspective from fact to argument.

there are ways of knowing, doing, and writing in the disciplines. Michael carter has written an article on the ways of knowing, doing, and writing in the disciplines. disciplines are defined by training people to do by the rules or a code of behavior. within writing, disciplines is defined as to impose order on serious writers and to refine their writing techniques. Michael carter suggests in his article that teachers must first understand their students writing before they can guide them in the next direction. after they have understood, they can then provide them with the criticism they need to become a better writer. writing outside he suggests is that you are writing for you, creatively with the rules. writing disciplined is you are following grammatic rules and regulations about writing and being a writer. “one way of understanding the distinction I am drawing between writing outside and writing in the discipline is the difference between knowledge and knowing,” he suggests that there is difference between knowing and knowledge. knowledge is what you have told or taught while knowing is what you have understood or taken from the knowledge that you have been told. the organization in the principle of knowledge has always been seen as conceptual knowledge. this is why educator and students understand learning in a discipline process in a short-term memory. the question is how you bridge the gap between writing in or out the disciplines.

I see that all three authors have agreed the curricula has taught students they must follow a system and keep up to make it in writing, when in reality that is not the case. the learning process for individual is different and not every educator should teach in the same way it has always been taught. all three of these authors seem agree that most students have not been prepared college and university level writing. a better idea would be to create a curriculum that benefits a student to become a better writer instead getting them by just enough to move up to the next level.