Teaching College Writing

Revision in the College Composition Classroom

Despite the linear structure implied with the traditional principle terms of the writing process (prewriting, writing, and revision), the writing process is recursive. Scholars have identified many dangers in viewing the structure as linear, especially the notion that revision happens during the last stage of the process. In “Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers,” Nancy Sommers highlights the history of the writing process and claims that the ending placement of revision was a historical accident (Sommers 378). The original structure of the writing process stemmed from the cannons of rhetoric, which initially focused on orators rather than writers. Orators and writers have a different process, though. Orators cannot revise what they say. The only way to eradicate something spoken is to verbal excuse an error. As Sommer explains, speech is restricted when it comes to revision, and writing begins at the limitations of speech (Sommers 379).  Placing revision at the end of the writing process instead of integrating it within the process, places emphasis on the final product instead of the process where the real discoveries and learning happens for writers. Revision occurs when writers first create a vision of a topic. It occurs when writers first put the pen to the paper. It occurs when writers begin making meaning out of what they wrote, and it occurs when writers shape their arguments and words for a specific intended audience.  Revision helps writers come to understand the writing process, and it helps build their writing relationship. What makes writing recursive is revision.

After reading the readings assigned for this week, I found Donald Murray’s terminology of the stages of writing the most accurate; however, he labels these stages as divisions. My concern with the term divisions is that it implies a linear process, still. When discussing the writing process with my students, I use the term “stages” instead of divisions. After reading the section of Sommer’s article that discusses the differences in terminology between student writers and instructors, I wondered if I should even use the term stages. However, the circling of the writing process can be confusion and can cause writers to view the backwards movement of the process as counterproductive. By providing the term stages and emphasizing that the stages do not have a set sequence order, it helps normalize the uncertainty and hesitation student writers may feel when moving in such a recursive manner. What blends these stages together is revision. Sommers defines revision as “a sequence of changes in a composition-changes which are initiated by cues and occur continually through the writing of a work” (Sommers 380). These cues align with what Sondra Perl defines in her essay, “Understanding Composition” as the felt sense. The felt sense is a feeling of bodily awareness that causes writers to pause and listen to the feeling inside of them that causes the backward movement in the writing process. With that being said, I like to define revision as any backward movement the writer does in order to move forward in his/her writing. Because the felt sense is an individualized feeling that occurs at different points for different durations of time for each writer, revision can be difficult to address in writing courses, but it still is an absolute necessity.

Before pen hits paper, the writing process begins with a vision of a message that a writer would like to communicate to others. The colliding of new information with a writer’s previous knowledge and experiences ignites this type of new idea. For example, after I read the readings for this week, I reflected back to my past experiences with revision. I thought about the papers I’ve written that I’ve been proud of and the ones that still make me cringe. Where was revision located in those instances? Was I introduced to revision or was it something I just did? How did I do it? When did I do it? What happened when I didn’t think I did it? That reflection and the rereading of the material led me to the question: is revision the center of the writing process or is it the integral factor that weaves the stages together into its recursive shape?  This question did not just appear in my head. It was the backwards movement of reflection and rereading of the material that was the catalyst at putting this idea into motion. 

            More ideas develop and grow when the write sits down to put their vision onto paper. Murray calls this first draft the discovery draft. Murray suggests that students should remain ignorant during this stage; they should begin without conceived intentions and focus on letting every word and idea rush out of them onto the paper.  By elevating the notion of intention, writers begin with a few words, and try to trust that the rest of the words will come to them as they go. Perl points out that student writers return to the topic or key words as they write their drafts to help them get going again when they are stuck. Perl notes that this feeling to move back and forth is the felt sense. It requires an open-mind and patience. This type of uncalculated discovery can be daunting. Perl notes that even English teachers have trouble with this step. Murray provides an example of a philosophy professor who confessed that he was ashamed of his writing because he had to write and write and write before he came to understand the meaning of what he was trying to say. Drafting forces writers to face their uncertainty about their ideas and voice. Revision turns their perspective of uncertainty into discovery. Revision- the backwards and forward movement of rereading and returning to words- can help free writers of this imposter feeling and unjustified shame. It helps them continue to move forward. It causes readers to begin thinking about the writing process and their writing relationship.

Revision also helps writers take the writing in their drafts and try to locate patterns in it to make meaning from what they wrote. Once writers make meaning with what they wrote, they review their work reread it from a reader’s perspective and reshape the content. By providing student writers with revision strategies and time to apply it, student writers are able to help them become aware of the felt sense and identity larger issues with their work. Revision helps writers see the concertation repetition in their work not just hear the lexical repetition.

Assuming that students do not revise because they are lazy is a false assumption. Student writers just don’t know how to revise because the concept is too often presented as the ending stage of the writing process. The more I thought about this, I started to reflect back on my writing experiences as a student writer and a writing instructor. It has taken me a long time to understand revision, and, I still have difficulty applying it. Not because I don’t want to, but because it requires time to wade in the uncertainty as I reread material, to practice vulnerability as I clumsily write my draft and constantly return to the handful of words at the forefront of my mind as I wrote, and to take time to review my writing from a reader’s perspective. Time is a valuable commodity. Time is a privilege that many student writers, including the ones in my classroom and myself, don’t have the luxury of possessing. Yet, even though I have experienced this myself, and I know that the writing process requires writers to move slowly at the beginning and utilize the strategies of revision throughout the process, I still, at times, fall into the habit of applying the traditional linear writing process with my students because there’s too much to cover in sixteen weeks. Plus, just like the discovery process of the writing process requires students to let go, to be present of the felt sense that drives revision, and to trust the process, it’s difficult, at times, to practice acceptance, awareness, patience, and trust while I teach it. To do so requires me to let go of control: trying to contain all of my student to be at the same stage of the process with due dates; prioritizing a lecture going over new material rather than having one-on-one conferencing, which helps me meet students where they are in the process; placing a number on the amount of revisions a student can turn in. All of these things reinforce the linear writing model that has stifled the progress of many student writers. As a student writer, my best writing has come from the courses that allowed me to revise, and my writing relationship developed from classes that created an environment where the art of revision was incorporated into the weekly classroom where student conversations were free from restriction and allowed the room to wander in order to make new discoveries. Discovery is an essential part of creating lifetime learners. In order for discovery to occur in a course, revision needs to be interwoven into the course fabric.

Critical Thinking Assignments

Many students enter the first-year composition class with the impression that writing is a communication skill not a critical thinking skill. Thus, it’s the goal of the writing instructor to show students other ways to imagine writing. This can be a difficult task when using traditional writing process terminology. The traditional writing process gives students a linear process: brainstorm, outline, draft, revise. It gives the impression that an idea magically pops into a student’s head and all they have to do is write it down, and voila: you have a paper. It doesn’t highlight the disorder of the ideas; it doesn’t discuss the chaos of the process or the struggle of making sense and order of those ideas. The traditional process reinstates to student’s notion that writing is just a communicative skill, not a critical thinking skill. As long as the writing sounds good, the content of the writing doesn’t matter. In order to help students, imagine writing in other ways, assignments must require critical thinking one that places tension and struggle into the process and demonstrates to students that just because you believe you have the “answer” to a problem, it doesn’t mean you are done with the discussion. Writing assignments that asks students to learn will require students to think rhetorically, will incorporate disciplinary problems and genres, and will treat writing like a process by including a repertoire of critical thinking tasks.

Assignments that asks students to learn will require students to think rhetorically. These assignments will have a rhetorical context built into the assignment and requires students to identify a problem and/or come up with alternative solutions to approach a problem (Bean 45).  The formulation of the assignment questions will depend on students’ level of expertise on the subject and their current engagement with the material (Bean 6). In Engaging Ideas, Bean offers a template to give to students during the early stages of the assignment. Students are asked to consider what their readers already know about the topic they are writing about and how their readers will think differently after reading their paper. These types of questions force writers to consider their audience and rhetorical situation early on in the writing process. It also helps students understand that the course readings aren’t just material and information they should know and regurgitate but are arguments and part of a discourse that they are invited to take part in. 

Assignments that introduce students to disciplinary problems and genres also help students to think rhetorically. They demonstrate academic “moves” and introduce students to the expectation, format, and types of evidence in a specific field of study. In other words, they are guides to help students engage and participate in the discourse. They will also help students see the possibilities, limitations, and constraints of the genre (Bean 46). When students feel they are participating in a discipline’s discourse, it creates a sense of community and provides students with purpose for their work and makes them more eager and willing to learn.

Finally, assignments that ask students to learn will treat writing like a process. In other words, it doesn’t just ask students to take the information presented in class and write a paper about it one time. A critical thinking assignment will encourage multiple revisions and include a variety of critical thinking tasks such as reflection, exploratory writing, and small group discussions. These tasks are low-stake writing tasks that provide students with the opportunity to explore more complex ideas. Reflection and small group discussions help students suspend judgment, evaluate evidence, and listen to opposing views. Exploratory writing records the process, and multiple revisions keep students on track for an extended period of time. All of these critical thinking tasks of the assignment help students view writing as a critical thinking skill.

Critical thinking is no easy task. It can feel like an uncomfortable challenge that requires risk taking in a discipline that has expectations that are foreign to students. Critical thinking assignments don’t just instruct students on what to do but are guides that help students navigate through the process. It turns writing from a communicative skill to one that is necessary skill for growth and learning.