Rebecca Writes

UWRT 1101 Spring 2015

[uwrt-rebecca]

I’m blogging at http://writeintobeing.tumblr.com this summer about writing topics. Follow if you’d like!

[uwrt-rebecca]

It’s going to be a busy week with the end of the semester conferences and the start of finals. Make sure to take care of yourself during this busy time! Best wishes for you all on your finals!

[uwrt-rebecca]

[freudsenigma-blog-blog]

To Invoke Change

I think as a person writing the civic writing it is figuratively a good idea, meaning that it is good practice, but in a literal or real world it doesn’t actually get used. When I say used I don’t mean that it doesn’t happen, or that were not writing. What I really mean by this is that no one cares no one actually cares what I’m writing or who I’m writing to and no one actually takes my ideas seriously anyway so why does it even matter one way or another? Maybe there was a time when people used to take civic writing seriously. In fact I believe that there truly was. There’ve been plenty of times where people of tried to invoke change and used their speaking and writing abilities to do so. That being said, nowadays greed is the driving force that pushes all of us. it may not be a driving force in everyone, but it is a driving force in enough people to where it is one of the only things that truly matters anymore. Powerful teachings from people like Gandhi just aren’t as important, And presidents are too worried about getting reelected to care about what actually matters. Great speakers and writers like Martin Luther and Martin Luther King Junior hold no place in today’s society even if they were huge figureheads along time ago. Back then people cared about having a voice more than they did money or objects, and people wanted, and were willing to fight to invoke change. You don’t see that willingness to fight or that desire to have in today’s society.

[uwrt-rebecca]

Why do we rely or only look to “powerful speakers”? Where are the every day people affected by or involved in social justice issues talking and writing about these things? I see it everywhere- and maybe it’s my age range - but I see people sharing on Facebook, Twitter, writing back to comments, writing blogs. I think we might not think these things exist because we don’t look for it. I hope next week we go looking for these things, and hopefully find that they are not so hidden and aren’t so limited to only famous/powerful people. Most “powerful speakers” did not start out being recognized immediately. They wrote and spoke their way into movements. 

[elancas1-blog-blog]

Catherine Gabor’s “Writing as a Public Power”

I think this article has some really powerful points. I like how it points out the difference between “civic engagement” and “civic literacy.” I, myself, have volunteered locally at Habitat for Humanity for a couple days as a community service duty. I agree with Gabor a lot about her points on young adults. I feel like it’s almost useless to reach out to political systems because it’s not going to make an impact; a little one, if it does. I’d rather do things on a local and personal level so I can see the results of my efforts instead of writing a letter as a civic literacy or voting as a civic engagement and hopefully and maybe see or hear a response out of the other thousands that are also waiting to see or hear a response. Towards the beginning of the article, I like how Gabor mentions writing is equally, if not more, powerful of a source to get what you want. I agree with her and I don’t at the same time. I think words are definitely a huge help, but I feel like speeches, lectures, etc. are more powerful than letters and books, just because it’s quicker to communicate by mouth than by typing it out and sending it. I think you can still come across with inspiration and problem solving techniques like Gabor wants with word of mouth. I agree with a lot of Gabor’s points and the article gave me a lot of perspective and insight. I think writing is a powerful tool, especially now in our day and age.

[uwrt-rebecca]

Something to consider: Speeches, lectures, passionate rants... all require composition (even if composed at the moment of utterance), and so they will tie well with Gabor’s points. You bring up a great note about circulation and audience that can help us think through how powerful various civic texts are.

[uwrt-rebecca]

In response to Glade's "Writing Across the University"

We should not take lightly the choice of which genres we ask our students to write in. Nor should we keep thosechoices invisible to students, as though all writing required the same stances, commitments, and goals; as though all texts shared pretty much the same forms and features; as though all literacy were the same. Nor should we ignore students’ perceptions of where they are headed and what they feel about the places we point them toward. --Charles Bazerman: “Life”

I wonder how many of us stop to consider why a teacher is assigning us to write on a particular topic in a particular way. On top of that, how many of us are willing to ask the teacher when we cannot determine the answer on our own?

One of the hardest things with planning a first year writing class is managing what my expertise tells me about teaching writing and what students expect of a first writing class. Research in writing studies show that writers become better at their craft by, you guessed it, writing; however, they only really become questioning, adaptable writers when they become AWARE of the process of writing and the contexts they are writing into. This makes sense when you apply it to other subjects. I can replicate a little science experiment I found on Pinterest, but, if I do not stop to reflect on these actions and what they mean and are supposed to do, I remain just a carrier of action rather than a producer of action. For our class this means that instead of learning certain formats/ways of writing, we have to learn various practices that transfer over to many different writing scenarios. After all, you will not be called on to write the same essay forever (thank goodness), so instead you need to learn how to adapt and how to take power in these different situations that often hinder your power.

It's normal - VERY NORMAL - to want the "secret" to writing in academic communities, especially when that writing holds heavy stakes for our continued education. Glade calls our attention to the fact that there just isn't a single secret. There aren't even 10 secrets! So what do you think? Is this freeing? Scary? What things do you need to know to adapt? How can we tell what each discipline is asking of us?

[cclar123-blog-blog]

A lot of time when we think about sponsoring literacy, we think about someone giving you a book at an early age or forcing you to practice literacy skills while in school. Malcolm X was a grown man who was in one of the most hopeless places on earth and all he had was a fire burning deep within that wanted to learn and to get better. He could have easily lost all hope, kept stumbling along, and gave up and said that was it. But it in a fell clutch of circumstance he decided to rise. Not only did he rise up as a person. He rose up with a community, religion, and race.

Cam: Malcolm X "Learning to Read" 

[s-flanders]

If someone is trying do something the best they can, it is practically a law of nature that they must fail, make mistakes or explore different ideas to get better at it.

Sean's Blog: Shitty First Anything 

[uwriteiwrite-deactivated2015100]

"Shitty First Drafts"

I’ve had my fair share of shitty drafts, and I mean SHIT-TY drafts; and, same as Anne Lamott, I feared people would see them — because they would. In my high school career we had a lot of writing. Me, being on the Honors and AP track (as well as being in special programs for gifted youths), thought this would be no problem. In the grand scheme of things, it wasn’t as big of a problem as it felt. Although I feel as if some people’s ideas of how smart I was started to waiver. 

In English class, we would write all types of assignments. Everything from Essays, to Articles, to Letters, to Reviews. The devastating thing was, we had to share the first draft. Then we had to get back our peer’s critiques.They would also write notes on it — the amount of red on my paper was more than I had actually written. Lots of them were circles with question marks where I had not finished an Idea or sentence, or went on a tangent that didn’t fit in the paper.

Similar to Anne, I would try to start writing right away like my classmates, but couldn’t. I would have one or two SHIT-TY sentences and then I would blank. I would sit there and read them and think “God, I sound like an Idiot.” Then I couldn’t even follow my crappy sentences up with anything. I would sit there and pretend to write, just wiggling my pencil so my teacher wouldn’t come over. Then I’d sharpen my pencil, or go the bathroom, or just find some excuse to move about the classroom. Then I’d come back to my desk and stare at the corner for a bit and EUREKA the answers would come to me.  

I think part of the reason my rough drafts were so shitty was I was learning new styles of writing. I knew I could clean up my writing when I needed to. This didn’t always mean my first drafts were shitty. No offense to Anne or her method, but I had become so proficient at writing essays I would literally write them the class before the class before they were due. If I had time I would maybe proofread it once. Then I would get the highest grade on it, even over my friends who had worked the entire week. 

So not all first drafts are shitty, but the important thing is that they can be. A first draft is like a sketch an artist makes on the canvas before they start painting. It often looks like a very poor, even childlike rendition of what could be art; but after a little shaping and some paint, you have a masterpiece. 

[morganbrimhalluwrt]

Shitty First Drafts

Surprisingly enough, authors that are known to many people around the world, cant even write a perfect draft. I always assumed that one day, after lots of practice, I would be able to write an awesome paper, story, or even a book on the very first try. After reading Lamott’s excerpt, I realize how naïve my last sentence sounds. No matter how great of a writer you become, writing still takes time. Even while I do my tumblr posts, which seem fairly easy because you can write about whatever you felt about a passage, I still go back, double check, and make sure everything is correct. That, in a way, is like a first draft. This was on of my favorite readings by far because it made me think that no matter how good someone is at anything, not just reading or writing, they still have drafts before their final outcomes. Some examples would be; practicing a sport before a game, a magician learning a new magic trick, or a dance team getting ready to perform for their first live audience. I guess the main thing I learned, is that almost anything you’re good at in life has a shitty first draft, even if you are very skilled in that department.

[michael-rubino-blog-blog]

Shitty First Drafts

What’s great about this explanation by Lamot is that pretty much any student and every writer can relate to this situation. I don’t think I have ever had a first draft that wasn’t shitty. Some people who think they have written an excellent first draft are probably deceiving themselves, convincing themselves that it is a good draft for a variety of reasons: not feeling the desire to write due to the topic, providing a sense of worth to their writing, etc. 

....

I remember that Hemingway once said that it is highly advisable that a writer not think too much about the writing outside of the writing. It seems that writers tend to follow this and use the drafts as the opportunity to do that thinking. 

I have found that the hardest part in writing is just getting those first few sentences down on paper. It is almost impossible to start with the right lead-in that will get the readers interested. This is where that shitty first draft comes in. Write down anything. Seriously. Anything. As the writer continues to write and let the words flow, eventually the true purpose of this particular part of the writing becomes clear whether it is an essay or a story with chapters. Along the way something in that flow of writing triggers something. 

[uwrtspring15]

Shitty First Draft

If it is true that most people have the fantasy of uninitiated, I am glad to know that I am not all alone in this. Because whenever I read a great piece of writing I always get the feeling that this writer must have known what he/she going to write before they sat down to jot it down. I have come to think that regardless of anyone’s competency as a writer, trusting the process is a good idea because I feel our thoughts open up more as we start writing. Being aware of the fact that the first draft is all about starting the process and putting the foundation and accepting that it is going to be bad and ugly empowers us to write fearlessly and also sometimes saves us from procrastinating. 

[voilalindsayanne]

[jeffbulanda]

Many times when writing, I find that I have no idea where to start. Ill start with something the think, “Nah, that’s just flat out stupid.” Reading Lamott’s article helped me understand that a first draft is just used to, I guess for lack of better word, ramble. She compared the first draft to a child. Sometimes it’s emotional, sometimes it’s crazy, and sometimes its just going to say things that just make you wonder. First drafts aren’t supposed to win a Pulitzer. If it does, congrats you probably did a damn good job. Just make your fingers move, make the pen write, and the pencil scratch. The words and sentences might seem completely off the wall, hell, some might even be the best you’ve ever written. Just shoot for it. It’s a first draft for a reason. You can clean it up later.

[mr-president44-blog-blog]

First Drafts Full of waste

The part that I disagree with is the “nobody is going to see it” piece. When writing for something school related…a lot of people are probably going to see it.

Many teachers like the idea of peer reviews which means you basically pass your awkward, poorly written, and sometimes personal piece of work around to basically the entire class…that’s a lot of eyes. 

[uwrt-rebecca]

Does that mean, then, that the piece we bring to workshop shouldn't be that first shitty draft and instead should be the 2nd draft?

[ppollach-blog]

Lamott Shitty First Drafts

...No form of writing will 100% be complete and 100% state what is within the writer’s endless spiral of creation. Every time we go back to our writing, we find something else that we could easily change, and sometimes say to ourselves:

But, in support of everything that we have all just read, push forth! Before we can even say practice makes perfect, we must first get it over with. What’s beautiful about writing is that we are humanly allowed to make as many touch-ups as we desire. Remember, your thoughts won’t be portrayed onto paper perfectly the first time.

[uwrt-rebecca]

Maybe this is what Andrew Stanton (TED Talk) meant when he said, "create wonder."

[uwrt-rebecca]

Moving from Scribner to Brandt

Scribner spoke about how literacy was social rather than individual. Yes, we as individuals have literacies in various subjects/languages at differing levels that make us unique to one another, but the process of getting those literacies, of experiencing them, is one that is contingent on community/context. 

"Most efforts at definitional determination are based on conception of literacy as an attribute of individuals; they aim to describe constituents of literacy in terms of individual abilities. But the single most compelling fact about literacy is that is is a social achievement; individuals in societies without writing systems do not become literate." - Scribner

Brandt picks this theme up and points out other aspects of literacy that educators need to consider. If we continue to think of literacy as only individual achievement, then it's easy to figure out where to place congratulations and where to place blame, especially in assessments that position people next to one another. Brandt points out that there are many things that shape the "route" of literacy, and she calls these people, materials, and programs "sponsors". I only asked you to read the accounts of Raymond and Dora, so we will look at their routes in class. I'm going to leave a quote here that we can revisit then. It puts forth the idea of who/what a sponsor is and what powers a sponsor holds.

"Sponsors, as I have come to think of them, are any agents, local or distant, concrete or abstract, who enable, support, teach, or model, as well as recruit, regulate, suppress, or withhold literacy -- and gain advantage by it in some way. Just as the ages of radio and television accustom us to having programs brought to us by various commercial sponsors, it is useful to think about who or what underwrites occasions of literacy learning and use. Although the interests of the sponsor and the sponsored do not have to converge (and, in fact, may conflict) sponsors nevertheless set the terms for access to literacy and wield powerful incentives for compliance and loyalty. Sponsors are a tangible reminder that literacy learning throughout history has always required permission, sanction, assistance, coercion, or, at minimum, contact with existing trade routes. Sponsors are delivery systems for the economies of literacy, the means by which these forces present themselves to -- and through - - individual learners. They also represent the causes into which people's literacy usually gets recruited." - Brandt

Somethings you may want to consider as you blog: Who are/were your sponsors? How did you access needed materials/opportunities to become literate? How did motivation play in to this social/individual achievement?