Thoughts on Post-process

As a public school teacher, I implemented a process approach to writing instruction. I used and loved writing workshop methods in my 2^nd grade classroom and helped other teachers implement the practice. Process writing allowed students to work at their own level and pace. It gave students an opportunity to express themselves in their own voice about topics that were meaningful to them. It gave me the freedom to meet the individual needs of students. Rather than teaching the same discrete skills to the whole class at the same time, I could pull up a chair beside a student and help them discover their goals as writers.  Most of my students embraced writing, and many of them even chose to take their writing journals to recess. It was one of my favorite times of day because I felt that students truly connected to their writing and to each other as a result of writing workshop.

Despite my successful experiences with writing workshop, I completely agree with a couple of points about the limitations of process writing. First, I think that it has often been oversimplified in practice. Matsuda mentioned Donald Graves’ “shock and dismay” at overhearing two teachers discuss “the three-step and the four-step Graves writing process.”  This incident seems familiar to me. I have seen entirely too many writing process posters hanging on classroom walls. It is also common for basal reading series to have a writing lesson plan that lists out a step in the writing process for each day of the week. (i.e. Day one: prewrite; Day two: draft; Day three: revise; Day four: edit; Day five: Publish). These oversimplifications sterilize the writing process and do not resemble authentic writing processes.

I also agree that it is important to acknowledge the sociopolitical aspects of writing and writing instruction. This point makes me think about the discussions that I have had with my undergraduate students in the education department about codeswitching. I take issue with the argument that teachers can teach kids to codeswitch by explaining to them when and where it is appropriate to use their home language as opposed to standard English.  I think that it is disrespectful and counterproductive to tell students that their language is inappropriate in school or anywhere else without also discussing why it is considered inappropriate. When we explore the reasons for conceptions of appropriateness and inappropriateness, we infuse the conversation with issues of power. These discussions can help students choose how they want to communicate.