Critical Moves
Because I teach writing, and because my students publish some of their writing to the Internet, I’ve been thinking about the differences between blogging effectively, and simply writing online. This is a question that Bud Hunt explored recently, and he sees hypertext links as the essential difference. But I’m sure that Bud would agree there’s more to blogging than just adding links to our writing. Yes, linking matters in important ways. Mainly, it allows us to extend a conversation by connecting one source with another (like I’m doing here, now). Doing that requires us to make judgments about how texts are related, and to take a position relative to one or another. But that doesn’t happen just from the linking. The linking, as I see it, facilitates criticism.
It may seem obvious, but to contribute to a conversation, the writer should have something more to say. This is a point that Gerald Graff and Kathy Birkenstein make in a little book that’s been called “the Strunk and White of academic writing [pdf review]. The book is a how-to for academic writing, making the point that there are certain fundamental “moves” that a writer needs to make in order to interest anyone in what they have to say. Our writing, the authors argue, has to be connected to a larger conversation, and it is up to us to frame the discussion for our readers so they can see our point of view relative to someone else’s. “Otherwise,” they point out, “what you’re saying might be clear, but why you’re saying it won’t be.” Here is a lecture they gave on the material covered in the first chapter of the book [pdf sample chapter].
What sets this book apart from other writing manuals is that it provides dozens of templates for the writing conventions that writers use to frame their arguments. It seems contradictory to offer cookbook recipes for critical thinking, but after looking through the book, and considering the difficulty some students have with the concepts involved in summarizing and responding to texts, I think this book may have something valuable to offer writing teachers. The most basic form is the one that the title of the book is taken from: I say…. / They say…. I believe this is going to be a big help for my students, whose writing tends to be monologic and self-absorbed. They really don’t get commentary, which is one of the big difficulties I’ve run into trying to help them learn to blog about their online learning. A side-benefit may be that students, once they learn to spot these discourse patterns in other people’s writing, will be become more critical readers. With practice.
Graff and Birkenstein feel that it isn’t enough to say true things that conform to a thesis statement, and support it with evidence, which is how the essay form is conventionally taught. They remind us that in the real world, people don’t usually express themselves without some provocation. Our writing is improved, they say, when we include the voices of the provocateurs in what we have to say. Blogging, like academic writing, is a conversation. Isn’t it?
I’m not alone with my frustrations as a writing teacher, I know. And from what Gerald Graff has to say about working with university level students, the problem isn’t necessarily that my students are too young to learn how to react meaningfully to text passages. Graff makes the case that the job of schools is to induct students into the intellectual world of academia. “If they don’t talk our talk or have a sense of what our issues are,” he asked, “then in what sense are they being educated?” He explains that all of the academic disciplines are mediated by the talk of scholars, and that the job of teachers is to help students learn how to participate in that discourse. He is dismayed at how few college students are prepared “to take part in the literate discourse of their culture about important issues.” They Say / I Say is part of his answer for the problem.
I believe that we should try to encourage this kind of writing and reading at every level, and I join Deborah Meier in contesting the idea that “academics” are beyond the reach of disadvantaged students. This book offers an approach for teaching what Will Richardson has called “connective writing.” I’m going to give it a whirl, and read some more of the book. I’ll get back to you on it when I have more to report.

Bud Hunt wrote,
Doug,
I’d certainly agree that there’s more to blogging than links. In fact, I think I’ve said so before, and certainly didn’t intend to say recently that links are the only difference. Good writing, both offline and on, involves the types of moves that you’re talking about. Yes, all writing, according to Bahktin, is a conversation, building upon the words and ideas of those who came before. Most comp/rhet folks talk about every piece of writing’s exigence, the unique series of events, previous utterances, world events, etc., that compelled a writier to write. No good writing occurs within a vacuum.
I had a copy of _They Say/I Say_ on my last desk - I think there’s useful stuff in the book. Sadly, I put it in a box when I changed gigs. Maybe it’s time to dig it back out. I look forward to your take.
Link | March 16th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
Doug Noon wrote,
Yeah, well….I was using your post as my springboard, not to disagree with you. I wanted to take the discussion beyond where you left off because it’s been on my mind a lot this year. And I also wanted to say something about the book, which seems to hold promise for helping me draw some bigger ideas out of my students’ writing. It’s encouraging to me that you already knew about Graff’s book. Thanks for the post, and the response.
Link | March 16th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Bud Hunt wrote,
You’re welcome. I look forward to having a chance to intersect with your thoughts more for a bit. Been missing writing (and thinking) ’bout writing.
Link | March 16th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
Nancy wrote,
You might enjoy these two blog posts– The Golden Compass http://areallydifferentplace.org/node/851 and God and Snow Days http://areallydifferentplace.org/node/861. The posts and comments are three 6th grade girls in my gifted class. You can see they are still struggling to verbalize their feelings and beliefs but at least they are trying. The long comment on The Golden Compass post is a parent, of a different kid.
Link | March 17th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Doug Noon wrote,
Nancy, great links! I may share them with my students to see if they spark anything.
Yes, they are trying, and it’s important to celebrate the effort.
Having another teacher in the room during writing workshop this year helps me to stay focused on the progress and effort some of my students are making. Your comment had the same effect. Thanks.
Link | March 17th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Eric Hoefler wrote,
Hello Doug. I’ve worked with some of the “moves” in Graff/Birkenstein’s little book. My students found them very helpful. As you suggest, these moves aren’t the “end” in learning to write effectively, but they’re a great beginning.
One of Graff’s arguments (both in the work you reference and in *Clueless in Academe*, which I would also highly recommend) is that we ask students to play this “game” called discourse, and we penalize them when they “play it wrong,” but we never let them in on the reasons behind the rules or teach them any of the tricks. Why not?
The “moves” he spells out are helpful steps toward correcting that problem, and the ties you make between these steps, “connective writing,” and hyperlinks is a helpful extension. Thanks.
Link | March 18th, 2008 at 4:53 am
Doug Noon wrote,
Eric, it’s good to get another endorsement of this idea. I’m especially intrigued with the notion that younger students might benefit from this kind of scaffolding for their writing.
Link | March 18th, 2008 at 5:22 am
“Ugh! Miss Fowler! Why do I have to use someone else’s ideas?” « Fresh Funk wrote,
[...] wrote something in a way that made sense considering everything else going on in my little brain. Noon’s review says: Graff and Birkenstein feel that it isn’t enough to say true things that conform to a thesis [...]
Link | March 19th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Heather wrote,
Hi Doug,
I wanted to leave you a comment because I have been struggling with my 12th grade students and their absolute refusal to incorporate the ideas of others. Some days, I think it stems from their desire to be individuals. I mean, I don’t think a single one of them uses the same theme, let alone the same header image. They want their audience to know who they are, which is why I think they write about personal experience so much. It’s hard to remove their “identity tunnel vision,” even as Senior English students.
I included one of your paragraphs regarding They Say/I Say in my latest post, which is predominantly a rant. Your words really made my struggle clear to me, and I’m writing to ask if you think They Say/I Say can be of any use to a high school teacher.
Thanks again!
Link | March 19th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
Doug Noon wrote,
Heather, my short answer: Yes!
Graff made the point that even academic journals include guidelines for abstracts. He teaches at the university, and uses those templates with his students. One of the things that is fun about the book are some of the exercises encourage the reader to look for these discourse patterns in other published writing. Your students who insist on being “individuals,” may appreciate seeing how much easier it is to set yourself apart from others when you stand what they said up against what you have to say in your own writing.
Link | March 19th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Michelle Glauser wrote,
I am getting a Master’s and I get so frustrated sometimes. I feel like my essay writing never was as good as it should be, and now I’m expected to write at a higher level. I feel dumb looking for a tutor at this point in my education. Advice? I’ve got “They Say/I Say,” and I used its ideas for a paper I worked on yesterday, but I still don’t feel like my essay is as strong as it should be.
Link | March 27th, 2008 at 1:45 am
Doug Noon wrote,
Advice?
Read. Write. Do stuff. Write more.
I’m bad at advice. That little book seems like a good place to start, though.
Link | March 27th, 2008 at 4:56 am
Terry Elliott wrote,
I use G & B for at-risk freshman comp students. It is very challenging for them to internalize the lessons in it, but the theory that writing is as much a series of tribal understandings (sacraments and taboos) appeals to students. It is simply true that most of writing falls into set patterns. Just look at the editorial board writing at the New York Times. My students are amazed at how cookie cutter they are. And at how simple and effective they are. I am happy to see others adapting this little book for many purposes. I really don’t think of it as a contemporary Strunk and White, but more along the lines of Buddhist mindfulness. All they ask is that you pay attention to how the writing world works and then try it yourself. In other words you see how they, the writers, say it and then you move back to how you say it. Old school notions of summary and critique are naturally folded into the production of writing. I especially love the sense of fairness in the chapter on ‘naysayers’. Glad you mentioned this little book with an awful lot to say. I combine it with a subscription to the NYT and I have all the textbooks I need.
Link | March 30th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Blogging Binds Critical Reading and Writing « InfoTech4Lrng wrote,
[...] think Doug Noon takes this even a step further at his blog Borderland: …there’s more to blogging than just adding links to our writing. Yes, linking is [...]
Link | April 6th, 2008 at 6:33 pm
A Blog Banquet « InfoTech4Lrng wrote,
[...] to writing in general rather than specifically to blogging, Doug Noon tried a They Say / I Say approach in Writers’ Workshop to help students “whose writing tends to be monologic [...]
Link | April 6th, 2008 at 6:34 pm