A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing

http://www.jstor.org

A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing

Author(s): Linda Flower and John R. Hayes

Source:

College Composition and Communication,

Vol. 32, No. 4, (Dec., 1981), pp. 365-387

Published by: National Council of Teachers of English

Stable URL:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/356600

Accessed: 21/04/2008 22:38

Flower and Hayes present the writing process in a very non-linear way and even highlight the fact that although traditional writing models present the writing process in a linear way, it is not linear. Furthermore, it is noted how surrounding factors outside of the body have an affect on what the writer might compose along internal factors as well. The writing model presented in this article begins with the “Rhetorical Problem” the aspect of the writing model and process consists of the writers main idea or topic in which he or she is going to write about, along with the audience in which he or she will be writing for. In addition to the writers main idea/topic, and audience there is the writer’s goals as well. Moving from the “Rhetorical Problem” is “Long Term Memory”; the long term memory aspect of this model or process appears be play a key role in the writer building on whatever their topic might be. Moreover, the “Long Term Memory” portion is where information regarding the topic along with the audience is stored; thus allowing the writer to produce a piece that not only builds upon his or her topic but also engage the audience as well. The “Long Term Memory” stores the “knowledge of writing plans” (Flower & Hayes, 369). In addition, the “Long Term Memory” stores which direction or various directions the writer wishes to take when composing his or her writing piece. What is very interesting about the “Long Term Memory” aspect of the writing model Flower and Hayes discuss is the idea that there are particular cues that can prompt one’s long term memory. For example, Flower and Hayes use the beginning line of. . . “Write a persuasive….” (Flower & Hayes, 371). Such cue and other cues will spark the writer to regenerate ideas in which he or she can add to their writing piece. The next aspect of the writing model is the “Planning” portion, which consists of various subtopics. Subtopics such as “Generating Ideas”; “Organizing”; and “Goal Setting” are listed under planning and have an influence on planning. This is another interesting aspect of this particular model, in traditional writing models or processes, planning occurs first rather than in the middle.

The article concludes with the idea that writers compose their writing goals by generating ideas; however, such ideas can be regenerated along with the goals. Writing is never ending, and not linear, it is continuously evolving and changing and writers regenerate new ideas or even as their long term memory is being cued and new ideas and knowledge are being brought to light.

From this resource I learned that planning is something that is not always done at the beginning of the writing process or at least does not have to be done at the beginning of the writing process. I also learned that within planning there are various subtopics that influence planning, such as organizing, generating ideas, goal setting, etc. This resource was helpful because it was able to provide me with a very different writing model that is not linear. I am including this source in my collection because as mentioned it has provided me with a different view of what a writing model can look like.

Primary Children’s Concepts about Writing

Primary Children’s Concepts about Writing

Sandra E. Shook, Leslie V. Marrion and Lloyd O. Ollila

The Journal of Educational Research

Vol. 82, No. 3 (Jan. – Feb., 1989), pp. 133-138

Stable URL:  http://www.jstor.org/stable/40539583

The “Primary Children’s Concepts About Writing” discussed the various views in which children at the primary level have in regards to writing and overall writing process. This article uses research to confirm that as children older their interest and confidence in writing and understanding the writing process decreases. Students’, at the primary level, perception of writing is highly influenced by those around them, especially by adults, and their perceptions about writing. When students were asked they don’t enjoy writing or lack confidence in writing it was primarily due to mechanical reasons.

In regards to the writing process, the article suggests that this is a process that is all about self-discovery for primary aged children. The writing process allows primary children to express themselves while making connections with other subjects and later being able to create a pattern of thoughts, that should not be focused on mechanics of writing but the creativity aspect of it. Although this study proved to highlight that children at the primary lack an interest and confidence in writing, which later increase as they get older, it still was able to note children at the primary level enjoy writing that allows them to be creative and self express.

I learned that students lack interest in writing and the writing process, to children it is a laborious task that does not allow to be creative and self express and how such feelings increases as the student ages. I also learned that they way in which students view writing and the writing process is highly influenced for their peers, and especially adults.

Although this article does not really answer any of my guiding question, I chose to use it in my resource collection becomes I see connections between this article and Rohman’s article. This article highlights that students enjoy opportunities that allow them two write creatively and self-express which Rohman’s article suggests that prewriting stage is one of discovery and ultimately creativity as well. Over all, I believe I can use this resource to highlight the importance of the writing for all, especially children at the primary level, given it stresses the significance of creativity and self expression and it is during the never ending writing process that one is able to be creative over and over again, while implementing new “Subject Context” knowledge (Rohman 5).

Teachers’ and Students’ Perceptions of the Writing Process

Title:  Teachers’ and Students’ Perceptions of the Writing Process
Author(s):  Christopher Jeffery
Source:  Research in the Teaching of English, Vol. 15, No. 3  (Oct., 1981), pp. 215-228
Publisher(s): National Council of Teachers of English
Stable URL:  http://www.jstor.org/stable/40170790

This article discusses the various perceptions teachers and students have about the writing process. Although the student perceptions were interesting, it was interesting to note the teachers perceptions, given they are the ones to teacher and enforce specific writing processes. In regards to the teacher perceptions, it was noted that teachers feel “constrained” when it comes to the writing process like they have no control over what takes place when writing. It was interesting to learn that some teachers feel this way. I could only understand this matter from an a primary teacher perspective and I think because I provide my students with such a strict structure and teaching them the basics, I feel very much in control; however, it would be interesting to see if that feeling of control would shift if I was in a high school, like the teachers noted in this article. This article proved to be helpful, because it provided me with an alternate perception of the writing process, allowing me to view this process from a different angle.

Pre-Writing the Stage of Discovery in the Writing Process

Pre-Writing the Stage of Discovery in the Writing Process

D. Gordon Rohman

College Composition and Communication

Vol. 16, No. 2, Critical Theory and the Teaching of Composition, Satire, Autobiography (May, 1965), pp. 106-112

Publisher(s): National Council of Teachers of English

Stable URL:  http://www.jstor.org/stable/354885

Rohman’s article “The Stage of Discovery in the Writing Process” highlights the importance of prewriting in relation to the writing process. Furthermore, the article suggests that the writing process is a process that is a never-ending process, and the process first begins with throwing out ideas in which you wish to write about. Although one may list several ideas, concepts, etc. in which one wishes to write about it takes a “heuristic process” (page 4) in order to bring out exactly what it is one wishes to write about. Therefore, the article suggests there is two thought processes involved in the prewriting stage, and that is one being very free merely listing ideas, and the other being a very in depth process, which involves isolated thinking in order for the writer to pinpoint that it is he or she wishes to write about.

The article continues to note that the prewriting stage is a very important stage of the writing process because it is the discovery stage. It is a stage that allows the writer to discover various pattern that will help he or she conduct a writing piece that is both “original and fresh”(page 5). A writer is able to produce a piece that is original because he or she is able to implement their own thoughts and opinions in their writing, which Rohman calls “Personal Context.” Personal context consists of the thoughts and opinion of the writer. Personal Context creates the originality of the writing piece, while “Subject Context” makes up the fresh portion of the writing. An example of the “Subject Context” would simply being the use of encyclopedia in order to better enhance one’s knowledge and writing. The combination of Personal Context and Subject Context leads to original and fresh work, according Rohman. Writing is about finding patterns between the two, but the prewriting stage, also known as the discovery stage, provides a foundation for the writer; later allowing the writer to implement both personal and subject context in order to create a writing piece that reveals patterns, along with freshness and originality.

Rohman’s article really went into detail about the writing process but more importantly the prewriting process or stage. It allowed me to think deeper in regards to prewriting because of the two different thought processes Rohman believes to be involved in this stage in order to create a writing piece that is both original and fresh. I also learned about Personal and Subject Context and the importance behind combining two. What I enjoyed most about this article was Rohman’s emphasis on being original and how a writer must first be original and then reach out to other sources and use Subject Context.

I decided to use this resource in my collection because it has provided me with insight in regards to the writing process and an aspect of my guiding questions is what are the various ways in which the writing is presented and/or viewed. Rohman’s article has provided me with an insight of the writing process that heavily focuses on the prewriting aspect, which is one of the many ways in which the writing process could be presented.