Carol Berkenkotter explores the cognitive processes and strategies employed by a writer during the planning and revision stages of the writing process. I enjoyed how she dove into the complexities of decision-making in writing. It was easy for me to understand how writers navigate various options and make revisions based on feedback and self-assessment. I like how she points out the importance of adaptability in writing. In writing, the writer must continuously evaluate their work and make choices to enhance their vocabulary and clarity. The specific case study the article illustrates did confuse me quite a lot. I think it was mostly to illustrate the dynamic between planning and revision. Demonstrated how strategies evolve over time, and how they adapt their plans based on feedback, but overall, that specific area of the text was very confusing for me. The article ultimately argues that successful writing involves revisions, and adaptability can help your writing.
Donald M. Murray critiques the nature of a laboratory setting and raises questions about the psychological and emotional impacts on the researchers. He mentions consideration and ethical standards. He advocates for more humane practices in research and our use for a greater awareness of experiences and the necessity of ethical guidelines. I like how he brings up that there is no one specific way to study the writing process, because everyone is different. I found myself agreeing with the points that both of the writers made, and even though it was a long read, I felt that I gained a lot of knowledge about introspection and effective conditions that are important in writing.
Leave a Reply