THE USES AND LIMITATIONS OF PERSONAL OR PERSONALIZED WRITING IN WRITING THEORY, RESEARCH, AND INSTRUCTION

Authors
Citation
S. Stotsky, THE USES AND LIMITATIONS OF PERSONAL OR PERSONALIZED WRITING IN WRITING THEORY, RESEARCH, AND INSTRUCTION, Reading research quarterly, 30(4), 1995, pp. 758-776
Citations number
80
Categorie Soggetti
Psychology, Educational","Education & Educational Research
Journal title
ISSN journal
00340553
Volume
30
Issue
4
Year of publication
1995
Pages
758 - 776
Database
ISI
SICI code
0034-0553(1995)30:4<758:TUALOP>2.0.ZU;2-B
Abstract
IN RECENT decades, curriculum theorists, researchers, and highly regar ded teachers in the field of writing have stressed the value of writin g assignments that invite students to focus on or frame what they read by their personal beliefs, experiences, and feelings, in both the Eng lish language arts class as well as in the content areas. Proponents o f this emphasis believe that such writing heightens students' involvem ent in their learning and thus serves as a means to enhance both subje ct matter learning and their willingness to write and to work on their writing. However, there has been no attempt to determine if this reco mmended emphasis on personal or personalized writing seems to be warra nted by the results of relevant empirical studies. In this article, th e author first discusses both the rationale and uses for personal or p ersonalized writing in the composition, literature, and content area c lass, and in curriculum conceptualization, research, and assessment in writing. She then discusses the relevant research studies and pedagog ical criticisms that can inform our understanding of the effects of us ing these kinds of writing assignments in each of these areas. The res ults of the research studies suggest that an excessive emphasis on per sonal or personalized writing, at least as it has been taught or used, is not warranted, underscoring the need for educators and researchers to examine empirically any theoretical claims and strongly advocated pedagogical practices, no matter how reasonable and appealing these be liefs and practices may seem. After some speculative comments on the p ossible intellectual limitations of these kinds of writing assignments , the author concludes by arguing that what may be needed pedagogicall y is a developmental writing curriculum that places a balance between ideocentric and personal or personalized writing at its center. What m ay be needed theoretically is a view of reading experience itself as p art of our personal knowledge, as part of what students should draw up on in responding to academic or literary texts, and as a powerful infl uence on the development of their writing abilities.