Writing Spaces

Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing  (volume 1)

Edited by Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky 

Parlor Press, 2010

ISBN 978-1-60235-184-4 

Reviewed by Meagan Rodgers, PhD

University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma

 

Getting Started

Getting Specific

Invention

Other Issues

Conclusion


Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing (volume 1) creates a new category of first year composition textbooks.  Editors Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky offer a set of essays written by composition scholars for an audience of first year writers.  The editors characterize this unique writer-reader relationship: by “drawing on their own experiences, these teachers-as-writers invite students join in the conversation about developing nearly every aspect of the craft of writing” (ii). In these essays, writers speak directly to students in their capacity as agents of their own writing development. 

 

Writing Spaces is also unique because of its multiple modes of delivery.  It is available in traditional book form from Parlor Press, but it is also available for free as an Adobe Acrobat .pdf file-- download the full book, or download only selected chapters.  The first page of each chapter includes a footnote with information on the Creative Commons license under which the book is released. This Creative Commons (Attribution Noncommercial- Share Alike 3.0 United States) license means that as long as a user includes an attribution, does not use the text for commercial benefit, and freely shares the text with others, distribution is unfettered.  

 

The text contains an introduction and sixteen separate essays on a range of composition concerns.  The contents are not overtly organized under subheadings, though there is a logic behind the order in which the articles are presented.  The first three essays address “getting started” concerns-- issues that a student might have at the beginning of a course or an assignment.  The next two articles address getting specific with writing assignments.  Following those pieces are three invention-themed essays.  The remaining eight essays address a host of writing issues.  I have organized this review under these inferred subheadings.

Getting Started

“What is ‘Academic’ Writing?” by L. Lennie Irvin is a practical introduction to the task of college essay writing.  Irvin’s goal is to demystify the process of creating a piece of academic writing.  “Your success with academic writing,” Irvin explains, “depends upon how well you understand what you are doing as you write and then how you approach the writing task” (3).  In this article, Irvin addresses myths about writing, decoding writing assignments, types of argumentative tasks in writing, and characteristics generally found in successful academic writing.  Relying on examples drawn mostly from history, literature, and cultural analysis, the advice seems best tailored to writing for the humanities and social sciences, though the tips Irvin provides would help students across the curriculum analyze and complete writing tasks.  

 

Having first given readers some practical suggestions about how to conceive of academic writing, Writing Spaces next offers some tactics for students to try once they are faced with a specific writing assignment.  In “So You’ve Got a Writing Assignment, Now What?”, Corrine E. Hinton recognizes that “fear, anxiety, avoidance, and even anger are typical responses” (19) to writing assignments.  To combat these negative reactions, Hinton offers a systematic approach to “interpret writing assignments” and “encourage productive dialogue” with classmates and instructors (19). Hinton incorporates commentary from actual students on how they proceed through writing assignments, thus increasing the relatability of the piece for student readers.  Another strength of Hinton’s essay is the breadth of relevance across disciplines.  The essay includes actual writing assignments from philosophy, business, and biology, which show how her suggestions can be broadly applied.  

 

The third “getting started” article addresses a common misconception about types of writers: “The Inspired Writer vs. The Real Writer.”  The greatest strength of Sarah Allen’s contribution is the thorough, personal exploration of what it means to refute the myth of the “Inspired Writer.”  Allen offers herself as a portrait of a “Real Writer’” one who struggles and succeeds.  “[W]e often assume,” Allen explains, “that if writing does not come easily, then our writing is not good-- and in turn, that we cannot be good writers” (36).  This contribution is heavily grounded in Allen’s background in English studies, full of references to compositionists including David Bartholomae, Peter Elbow, and Patricia Bizzell, as well as canonical authors like Shakespeare and Hemingway.  For that reason, this article will likely resonate most clearly with students in the humanities.  

Return to Top

Getting Specific

After these three opening essays, the editors include two pieces that deal with more specific writing tasks.  Laura Bolin Carroll offers “Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps Toward Rhetorical Analysis.”  Carroll defines rhetorical analysis as examining “how discourse functions in the setting in which it is found” (56).  This student-friendly definition is characteristic of Carroll’s approach throughout the article.  “The more we know about how to analyze situations and draw informed conclusions,” Carroll explains, “the better we can become about making savvy judgments about the people, situations and media we encounter” (46). She draws on a variety of examples-- from sizing up a new teacher to watching television ads-- to first show students that they are already rhetorically analyzing situations, and second to show how to better use rhetorical analysis in an academic context.


Following this lesson in rhetorical analysis, Beth L. Hewett considers “From Topic to Presentation: Making Choices to Develop Your Writing.”  Hewett focuses on “using feedback from peers, instructors, or other readers” (59) as a way to move forward in the writing process.  The essay simulates a process that Hewett uses in her classroom: the students give her a topic and she composes an essay on that topic.  She walks readers through this process too, offering a look at brainstorming, zero-drafting, and creating a preliminary draft.  The bulk of the article focuses on this preliminary draft.  Hewett shares it with students electronically and includes some screen shots of excerpts and student feedback in the article.  Hewett explains the revision decisions she made based on the student comments, thus making revision seem less abstract.  Student readers of this essay who thrive on learning by example will appreciate this detailed look at the feedback and revision process.  

Return to Top

Invention

The next three contributions to Writing Spaces are more clearly thematically related: each considers invention.  The first of these is “Taking Flight: Connecting Inner and Outer Realities during Invention” by Susan E. Antlitz.  This essay represents the most abstract of the collection.  Antlitz presents several “avenues for generating ideas” (82) for writing topics. Her suggestions include a winged-bird brainstorming diagram that brings together the personal and the social to generate topics.  Antlitz also provides a number of creativity exercises including reflective writing, painting, and even conversing via facebook with others. The invention strategies seem best suited for writing in less structured genres. In an uncommon move for scholars discussing assignments in academic settings, she also encourages students to explore practices of prayer, meditation, and play as other sources for writing topics.  In appropriate contexts, I can see students welcoming this kind of opportunity.  


Next, Michelle D. Trim and Megan Lynn Issac consider “Reinventing Invention: Discovery and Investment in Writing.”  Of all the essays in the collection, this piece is the most teacher-centric.  In “Reinventing Invention” the authors detail four different invention activities.  One of the activities is designed for individual use, while the others are designed for groups and thus are readily adaptable to the classroom. Trim and Issac’s suggestions will help students brainstorm topics based on genre, audience, purpose, as well as refine ideas that lead to researchable questions.  In addition to outlining steps for each activity, the authors contextualize some of the activities with commentary from writing students.  For example, when asked to react to a group brainstorming activity, one student wrote: “The activity was a great start to open our minds on what topic to write about. . . . Someone’s answer to a question might prompt me to say, ‘Oh really?  That’s surprising to me. I thought about it a completely different way’” (115). This response and other candid comments throughout illustrate the usefulness of the authors’ suggestions. 


In the final invention-themed piece, “Finding Your Way In: Invention as Inquiry-Based Learning in First Year Writing,” Steven Lessner and Collin Craig offer invention not only as a means to start a writing project but also to generate options during writing.  They present several different invention activities, including reading rhetorically, freewriting, focused freewriting, critical (analytical) freewriting, and flexible outlining.  The authors then devote significant attention to the activity they term “auditory/dialogic generative outlining” (138).  This is a multi-step process that begins when a student identifies a central topic of interest and possible supporting ideas.  From there, Lessner and Craig guide the student reader through a process of sharing, questioning, discussing, and reflecting.  This is an intricate process, but the steps are thoroughly explained.  After reading this, a student should have a handful of new invention tools at her disposal. 

Return to Top

Other Issues

The remaining eight essays in the collection span a variety of topics.  The ninth piece “Why Visit Your Campus Writing Center?”, is written by Ben Rafoth.  In this essay, Rafoth encourages readers to visit writing centers by clarifying the ways that tutors can help student writers.  This essay is organized to highlight three primary benefits of a writing center visit: speaking with a tutor gives you a chance to converse about ideas, gain confidence in those ideas, and enhance the sense of audience for those ideas. Throughout, Rafoth includes comments from actual tutors at several different writing centers.  One experienced staff member understands her role this way: “we are not so much tutors as we are a presence that encourages you to write, to question your own logic, to revise, to reconsider” (149).  The inclusion of tutor commentary makes this a meaningful resource not only for student writers but also for tutors. 

 

Next, Rebecca Jones asks a relevant question for many first year writers.  In “Finding the Good Argument OR Why Bother With Logic?”, Jones presents several different strategies for enacting and analyzing argument.  She reviews several heuristics that are familiar to anyone who teaches argumentation.  She starts with classical rhetoric, devoting most attention to Aristotelian thought.  After discussing deductive and inductive reasoning, Jones reviews the appeals (ethos, logos, pathos) and Toulmin’s model of argumentation. The remainder of the article details a lesser-known analytical tactic: pragma-dialectics, which she explains as “a study of argumentation that focuses on the ethics of one’s logical choices in creating an argument” (171).  Pragma-dialectics offers a set of rules that, if followed, would lead to genuine discussion and exchange of ideas.  Jones explains that pragma-dialectics “seems[s] to consider argument as a conversation that requires constant vigilance and interaction by participants” (178). Pragma-dialectics is a new term for me, and I found Jones’s introduction clear and informative. 


The next essay addresses one of the most common questions I hear from first year composition students: can I use “I”?  Kate McKinney Maddalena responds in the affirmative in ‘“I need you to say ‘I’”: Why First Person is Important in College Writing.’ The author explains a few functions that the first person can serve: it allows the writer to show his stance or perspective on an issue, it enables a writer to make a clearer distinction between the argument and the sources used for support, and it makes it possible for an author to demonstrate ownership of a new argument or idea (182-4). Maddalena considers the title question within a variety of academic contexts, including cultural studies, psychology, and scientific writing.  While clearly advocating the use of the first person, the author recognizes that the acceptability of this tactic is “largely determined by context and by the conventions of the field in which you are writing” (180-1).  Maddalena acknowledges that scientific writing remains relatively free of the first person, though she does share examples of its effective use by professionals in the field.   The argument is convincing and appropriate for students writing in a variety of academic contexts.  


The twelfth article in Writing Spaces considers revision. “Reflective Writing and the Revision Process: What Were You Thinking?” is Sandra L. Giles’s attempt to acquaint readers with the role of reflective writing in the revision process.  Though she (wisely) waits until the third page to use the term “metacognition,” the entire essay advocates this approach to writing and revising.  Giles’s discussion revolves around her “Letter to the Reader” assignment.  For each major writing assignment, the author requires her students to write a reflective cover letter that addresses purpose, audience, message, and goals.  In the article, Giles includes the reflective letter assignment instructions and a sample that she models for her students.  The instructions seem thorough enough to guide students through successful construction of this letter.  Ultimately, Giles explains that the process of reflective writing can lead to a “habit of reflective thinking” (203) and metacognition that has applications across all kinds of projects.  


In the next piece, James P. Purdy looks at one of the most popular websites in the world in “Wikipedia Is Good For You!?”  Purdy answers “yes.” Here, Purdy first addresses the concerns that many instructors have about Wikipedia as a source: reliability.  Anyone can edit it at any time, so the information found there is not necessarily authoritative or consistent.  According to Purdy, perhaps the most persuasive reason not to use Wikipedia as a cited source, however, is that it does not meet the expectations of college writing.  Though professors expect students to engage with primary sources (not reference sources) in their writing, Purdy argues that Wikipedia is still valuable as a starting point for research because it presents relevant ideas, links, and search terms (209). After considering Wikipedia as a source, Purdy then offers up the website as a writing process guide.  He illustrates some of the qualities of good academic writing as they are mimicked in the process of contributing to Wikipedia.  Purdy explains: in order to add meaningful content to an article on the website, one must review existing information, converse with other contributors, enter in revisions, and be receptive to feedback.  Each of these steps are relevant to good academic writing (213-20).  


Next, Christopher Leary offers an essay entitled “Composing the Anthology: An Exercise in Patchwriting.”  This essay is perhaps the most unexpected in a collection of texts aimed at college composition students and instructors.  Leary advocates “patchwriting,” an exercise in borrowing pieces of texts or full texts and pulling them together to create a new thematic textual endeavor.  He first describes his own early patchwriting exercises-- pulling sentences from texts on his shelf and organizing them to create a poem.  This exercise in creating “found poetry” led Leary to consider the pedagogical value of patchwriting as well as anthologizing. When Leary asks his composition students to craft anthologies, he finds that they read differently, with a greater eye toward the utility of the text.  Of one student, Gail, he says she found herself reading primarily for “what she can do with the text, how she can utilize it . . . how she can put it to work” (231).  Arguably, this parallels the best ways that students can read sources when researching.  


Not only does Writing Spaces take advantage of an online channel of distribution in its presentation to the public, it also includes a consideration of one technique made new online: collaboration. In “Collaborating Online: Digital Strategies for Group Work,” Anthony T. Atkins presents a detailed and practical look at ways for student groups to use online technology to enhance collaboration. “Using technologies to organize group work and projects,” Atkins explains, “can make group work more productive, alleviate problems with group members who are absent (or who do not participate), and cost nothing to use” (238).  Atkins focuses particularly on wikis and Google Docs. He explains the advantages for groups working with these tools: first, all group members have access to the most current versions of all files at all times.  Second, online collaboration may remove some of the obstacles that quieter students face during group work.  Third, the incorporation of new, user-friendly technologies may excite students who embrace the utility of Web 2.0 tools.  A newly-formed group equipped with a charge from the instructor and copies of this article is likely to adapt smoothly to online collaboration.  


The final essay in the collection is “Navigating Genres” by Kerry Dirk.  In this essay, Dirk provides an approachable introduction to genre theory for college writers.  Dirk makes the essay accessible first through examples (i.e. country music, sample headlines from the satirical newspaper The Onion), and second through carefully selected and presented quotes from genre theorists.  Dirk explains her goal for student writers: “to help you start thinking about how genres might apply to your own writing endeavors” (250).  She walks readers through her own process of composing the Writing Spaces article: Dirk explains that this particular writing project (i.e. composition scholars writing directly to an audience of college writers) is part of a relatively new genre, so there are fewer, more flexible rules for its form and content.  She writes in a straightforward, informal tone, “hop[ing] to come across as someone both informative and friendly” (251).  In all, Dirk makes a convincing argument about the utility of genre knowledge, emphasizing that “learning about genres and how they function is more important than mastering one particular genre” (259).  Given that the students in first year composition will face a wide range of writing tasks, Dirk’s assertion has important implications beyond the writing classroom.  

Return to Top

Conclusion

In the introduction to Writing Spaces, Robert E. Cummings explains that Writing Spaces is distributed under an “open source publishing model” (xiv).  While the term “open source” has roots in coding and programming, it has come to be broadly applied to instances in which content is freely shared, accessed, and (to varying degrees) altered.  Writing Spaces is the first open source composition textbook.  The writers have contributed their work for free; an editorial peer review board selected essays for free; the editors assembled, publicized, and made the work available for free.  To the extent that a user can opt to download selected parts or the whole, Writing Spaces is readily altered by the user.  This is not to suggest, however, that the editors invite piecemeal copying or plagiarizing.  Instead, the Creative Commons license allows the editors to encourage distribution within the constraints they determine to be fair and reasonable. 

 

Given the open source distribution, paired with the quality and breadth of selections, Writing Spaces is a welcome innovation in the composition textbook industry.  Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky have created a collection that is full of practical, insightful, and accessible advice for novice writers.  It’s hard to think of a reason not to recommend this text; given that it is entirely customizable, an instructor can disregard any articles that are not relevant to her classroom.  I can download one article this morning, make copies, and hand it out to my class this afternoon.  I can select several articles at the beginning of the term and add them to a course packet.  Or I can do away with printing altogether and give out the article link.  This flexibility also allows instructors to be responsive to students’ financial concerns: every student with access to a campus computer lab can read the articles free of charge.  Most writing instructors will find much to like in Writing Spaces; I certainly have.   

Return to Top