There are plenty of people who believe writing is a talent, not a skill. General writing is actually a mix of both, and that makes it difficult to properly measure, let alone teach. Writing is also heavily individualistic, and that creates more difficulty. I personally work off the theory that writing is a skill like any other. How honed it is, how well it reads – outside of clarity, it’s all subjective. The overlap between critical thinking – that is, asking questions in pursuit of an answer and analyzing what you have -, engagement, individuality, and active learning are what make writing worth doing and reading in the first place.
Catherine Savini’s Looking For Trouble: Finding Your Way Into A Writing Assignment and Elizabeth Wardle’s You Can’t Teach “Writing In General” overlap in these areas despite seeming to have two different opinions. Wardle is very clear: Writing is situation dependent, and therefore no such thing as plain “general” writing exists. Savini, on the other hand, provides a guide for writing that seems almost universally applicable.
Over the years I was taught to write very passively – us psychology majors love (or at least get very used to) it. My style of writing, though, is all me. I tend to be very flowery in my personal writing, leading to two distinct writing “voices”: my passive academic voice and my more flowery and involved personal voice. This divide leads to issues in my writing – even my critical thinking skills feel muddled parsing the difference. Does a sentence feel academic enough? Or is it too personal, not far enough removed from me? How I write is a crossroads – and it comes down to the core that Savini and Wardle share: critical thinking.
C. Savini
While reading, Catherine Savini reminded me of my first proper writing professor. Her assertion that “…you’ll have more success if you’re willing to cycle back in the process and refine your project and questions over the course of planning and drafting.” was advice I had heard before. At the time I was deeply offended by the notion. Savini’s process of working with an assignment struck me less as writing advice and more as life advice. Critical thinking, which is the core of Savini’s article, is useful for everyday life as much as it is for writing. It turns out that writing is a convenient excuse for practicing such a skill.
Asking questions, noticing small details, thinking and rethinking ideas and beliefs are cornerstones of Savini’s. They are also the basic tenets of critical thinking.
E. Wardle
Elizabeth Wardle, however, put me right back in my earliest composition class. I was homeschooled, and so my first composition class was a struggle. It frustrated me that how I wrote, while not bad, was not what my professor was looking for. “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.” Elizabeth Wardle writes, and my past frustrations feel vindicated.
As I get older, and arguably more skilled, it’s easier for me to see Wardle’s point. Writing is an individualized skill that shares building blocks but cannot be replicated or mass produced in one specific way. Even though academics try to stamp out the writer, even professional essays and journal articles have traces of their authors through them. Wardle, too, argues for critical thinking – the idea of “general” writing is an absurd one when the reality of individuality and situational awareness is taken into account.
Critical Thinking – The Mainstay of Writing
While both Savini and Wardle are making points about general writing, they’re also making a shared point about critical thinking.
Savini seems to take the reader’s hand and guide them through writing. “Here”, she says, “this is how to make it work.” And yet, she’s not providing a guide for writing – she’s attempting to teach how to think critically. Wardle is making a more direct plea to writers in her article. “Really think about what you were taught! Does that seem right?” She asks, a written equivalent to throwing her arms up in exasperation. They both, in their own ways, build on critical thinking as a basic requirement.
Class Homepage: https://eng2020.chrisfriend.us/
Leave a Reply