Dana,
I need to start off by apologizing for the delay on my blog! I had a tough weekend to get through with family, my job, and well, you know the rest. I was also working on our Theorist Card which is completed! And I know you were working on our Power Point Presentation to go along with the Theorist Card.
I want to comment on both Bean and Rose when they discussed “writing as a tool”. I certainly agree with this comment. When I think of tool I think of it as an instrument that helps you fix or do something. To me writing can help you do many things and can fix many of your academic problems. Would you agree with me on that? To me Bean was arguing that that writing is more than what is on paper. It is more then a grade, or more then spelling and grammar. It helps you in different ways.
When it came to reading Rose's article I found it both enlightening and also confusing. He explains that writing courses are "viewed with a curious eye" because they are seem "remedial" (342).I disagree completely! If it as not for writing courses then where would the structure of writing be taught? If a writing course has a “remedial” tone to it, it is only because the students in that class need extra help. I feel that removing writing courses from the curriculum gives students a huge disadvantage. What are your thoughts upon my opinions?
Sincerely,
Rosemarie Civitano
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yeah, Rosemarie, I get what you are saying about about needing writing courses, but for me "remedial" is a really poor choice of words. It makes it seem like there is a "cure" for what is considered poor writing. This makes it seem like writing is a product--cure, instead of a process.
ReplyDelete