Clustering the Clutter
"When students first begin a piece of writing, ask them to write their topic in the middle of their papers and then brainstorm a web of possible ideas around the main topic" (p. 35).
As I skimmed through chapter 4 of Heard's book, this raised a question. Does Heard view webbing as a universal tool for organizing the thoughts of a writer before and after composing the draft? I had my students construct webs for their compositions, mostly prior to the rough draft (counter to the non-linear approach to the writing process, I know), and several got stuck. They had not even figured out what it was they wanted to write about! And without a central topic, the web has no anchor! It was a terribly puzzling time for them, sitting there often for an entire period and not knowing what to write. This wasn't limited to a particular genre; short stories, personal narratives, persuasive essays, memoirs, and expository essays all had this conundrum at some point or other. It wasn't that my students didn't have any desire to produce words and ideas on the paper. They just weren't getting through to their creative synapses through the organizational tool of clustering. No doubt they had all sorts of ideas bouncing and skipping around in their brains, but the absence of an anchor, a topic, kept the ideas at bay and left them with a blank sheet of paper.
I'm glad that Heard seems to approach clustering, and indeed, other revision methods as a potential tool, not the singular approach. In other words, she seems to realize that one organizing strategy will not work for all students all the time. I didn't always model this in my classroom because I wanted my kids to try as many of the prewriting/revision strategies as they could to find what worked for them to the extent that I made them try all of them at least once. But they are so numerous that it weakens the freedom of choice that the writing workshop is supposed to give them.
I would suggest as an addendum to Heard's clustering that on given days, some kids may express trouble generating an anchor topic. Or they may have ideas for a variety of anchor topics, but are not sure which would make a compelling paper. Perhaps they could spend time writing down as many ancillary details as they can think of; often, the mark of a good paper isn't the main topic itself; it's how many supporting ideas can come out of it. If they can't create a few details around one topic, that might be a signal for them to abandon it and move on to something else, which I think all writers should have the freedom to do. Make sure it is clear that alternative means of prewriting/drafting/revising exist, and that the teacher's job is to help them to find the one that works best, not to prescribe a strategy that doesn't fit his/her strengths as a writer.
I'm currently planning to do my text set on dialogue, and so "A Roomful of Company: Dialogue" made me sit up and pay attention. Short stories gave me the most fits with getting my students to write purpose-driven dialogue; I'm grateful Heard addresses both sides of the coin. There's a time to let dialogue carry the story and a time to let a simple summation suffice. Often, the problem was "stilted speech" - characters not talking naturally or in a way that revealed more about them, but either because they felt they had to have dialogue in a short story (that brought me up short - was I unintentionally pushing that belief in my instruction?) or they couldn't think of anything for the characters to say, so they wrote whatever came to mind, heedless of any sort of outline or direction (which in itself isn't always a bad thing - except when you're trying to piece together your plot, and dialogue clutters your path with unnecessary obstacles).
Hmm. Being 'real' is also a theme for ch. 5 in CTW with building vocabulary. This is another issue not only with short stories, but most of the other compositions in my class. I confess, I am still searching for the best way to give my students enriching learning tools for vocabulary (thankfully, Cunningham & Allington back me up on this - p. 91); I stuck too closely to the conventional method of dishing out word lists and scheduling weekly/biweekly tests. I want to do more of pinpointing a word or two in the larger context of reading and writing because I believe it comes more naturally for students when they see the big picture.
As I skimmed through chapter 4 of Heard's book, this raised a question. Does Heard view webbing as a universal tool for organizing the thoughts of a writer before and after composing the draft? I had my students construct webs for their compositions, mostly prior to the rough draft (counter to the non-linear approach to the writing process, I know), and several got stuck. They had not even figured out what it was they wanted to write about! And without a central topic, the web has no anchor! It was a terribly puzzling time for them, sitting there often for an entire period and not knowing what to write. This wasn't limited to a particular genre; short stories, personal narratives, persuasive essays, memoirs, and expository essays all had this conundrum at some point or other. It wasn't that my students didn't have any desire to produce words and ideas on the paper. They just weren't getting through to their creative synapses through the organizational tool of clustering. No doubt they had all sorts of ideas bouncing and skipping around in their brains, but the absence of an anchor, a topic, kept the ideas at bay and left them with a blank sheet of paper.
I'm glad that Heard seems to approach clustering, and indeed, other revision methods as a potential tool, not the singular approach. In other words, she seems to realize that one organizing strategy will not work for all students all the time. I didn't always model this in my classroom because I wanted my kids to try as many of the prewriting/revision strategies as they could to find what worked for them to the extent that I made them try all of them at least once. But they are so numerous that it weakens the freedom of choice that the writing workshop is supposed to give them.
I would suggest as an addendum to Heard's clustering that on given days, some kids may express trouble generating an anchor topic. Or they may have ideas for a variety of anchor topics, but are not sure which would make a compelling paper. Perhaps they could spend time writing down as many ancillary details as they can think of; often, the mark of a good paper isn't the main topic itself; it's how many supporting ideas can come out of it. If they can't create a few details around one topic, that might be a signal for them to abandon it and move on to something else, which I think all writers should have the freedom to do. Make sure it is clear that alternative means of prewriting/drafting/revising exist, and that the teacher's job is to help them to find the one that works best, not to prescribe a strategy that doesn't fit his/her strengths as a writer.
I'm currently planning to do my text set on dialogue, and so "A Roomful of Company: Dialogue" made me sit up and pay attention. Short stories gave me the most fits with getting my students to write purpose-driven dialogue; I'm grateful Heard addresses both sides of the coin. There's a time to let dialogue carry the story and a time to let a simple summation suffice. Often, the problem was "stilted speech" - characters not talking naturally or in a way that revealed more about them, but either because they felt they had to have dialogue in a short story (that brought me up short - was I unintentionally pushing that belief in my instruction?) or they couldn't think of anything for the characters to say, so they wrote whatever came to mind, heedless of any sort of outline or direction (which in itself isn't always a bad thing - except when you're trying to piece together your plot, and dialogue clutters your path with unnecessary obstacles).
Hmm. Being 'real' is also a theme for ch. 5 in CTW with building vocabulary. This is another issue not only with short stories, but most of the other compositions in my class. I confess, I am still searching for the best way to give my students enriching learning tools for vocabulary (thankfully, Cunningham & Allington back me up on this - p. 91); I stuck too closely to the conventional method of dishing out word lists and scheduling weekly/biweekly tests. I want to do more of pinpointing a word or two in the larger context of reading and writing because I believe it comes more naturally for students when they see the big picture.
posted by david @ 6:01 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home