For this post, please start by writing in response to these questions After that, complete the reading and then respond to the second set of questions. You can do this all in one post.
- What is writing—the definitions, ideas, thoughts, expressions, etc.—that you associate with writing?
- What defines successful writing for you?
- What type of writer do you see yourself as, and why?
- Create a list of 5-8 key terms that define writing.
Now, read Johnson-Eilola & Selber’s essay and respond to these questions:
- What is the major argument that you see these authors making?
- What did you learn about writing from this text?
- Is this article “successful” according to the criteria you defined earlier? If so, how? If not, why not?
- Has your understanding of writing changed as a result of engaging with Johnson-Eilola and Selber's article? Why or why not?
- Do you want to revise your list of key terms based on this reading? Explain what you would revise (or not) and why (not).
1. Writing is expressing your thoughts in a way that others can understand through a medium.
ReplyDelete2. Successful writing to me is clearly getting your point across to the reader.
3. I see myself as a logical writer because I've never been good at having to deeply analyze things.
4. Key terms that define writing to me are tone, style, diction, mood, figurative language, and structure.
5. The major argument that the authors are making is that everything can be a form a plagiarism.
6. What I learned about writing from this text is that there are many forms of citing that can be either be accepted or not.
7. This article is successful according to my definition because it got its point across clearly.
8. My understanding of writing has not changed very much as a result of engaging with this article because I already knew most of this stuff but not its formal names.
9. I would not revise my list of key terms because I still feel that those terms adequately define writing.
Writing to me is portraying your thoughts, ideas, and imagination on to a piece of paper through text. Writing allows you to express your feelings for people to interpret and connect in different ways.
ReplyDeleteSuccessful writing is accomplishing your purpose that was set when you began writing.
I see myself as a fictional or short story type of writer because I have a good sense of humor and an imagination that allows me to create fun stories. I like this writing because it comes easy and naturally to me.
The key terms that define writing to me are imaginative, creativity, purpose, express, and personal
The major argument I see the author making is mainly about plagiarism and how plagiarism is all around us in forms other than writing that we may not always think of. I usually don't think of plagiarism as taking someones logo/designs of websites or even plagiarism in architecture so this argument really opened my eyes as to how far plagiarism can go.
I learned that writing should be your own work but by remixing information and ideas you find it can help you express your own ideas through writing without plagiarizing someone else’s work.
Yes, this writing is successful according to my definition because I feel it accomplished its purpose and informed me on plagiarism very well.
I wouldn't say my understanding of writing has changed from reading this article because it is still the general idea that writing is always your own work and comes from within your thought and beliefs, however it did inform me on a lot of things and broadened my understanding of writing.
I would keep the five key terms I previously wrote down for what writing is, but I would add that writing is complex and informative. I wanted to add these terms because that is how this article made me think of writing the entire time I was reading it.
ReplyDeleteWhat is writing—the definitions, ideas, thoughts, expressions, etc.—that you associate with writing?
Writing to me is a form of communication used to express an idea or present information to a group of people who are interested. I think writing a story can be easier for some more than others. I think writing something factual or academic is more a matter of knowledge and motivation. I typically enjoy being on the receiving end of writing because I like to see what others are thinking or what fantastic stories they can conjure up for me to fall in to. However, I associate negative or uncomfortable emotions with writing myself because it doesn't flow well for me and I tend to over-think my writing assignments.
What defines successful writing for you?
I would say successful writing is writing that is acknowledged or given positive feedback from others. You don't necessarily have to be published to be a successful writer, but if people respond to your writing and it can influence someone in some way, that's a job well done.
What type of writer do you see yourself as, and why?
I see myself as a struggling and uncooperative writer. In class and with assignments I typically dread having to write papers, but even on my own free time I struggle to come up with words to put in a journal or to send to someone in a text.
Create a list of 5-8 key terms that define writing.
Communication, expression, knowledge, understanding, sharing, work.
What is the major argument that you see these authors making?
The authors are arguing that instead of scaring college students away from using other resources for information or putting that information into their own writing, that colleges encourage assemblage as a method of writing to teach kids that editing or reconfiguring a previous piece is creative.
What did you learn about writing from this text?
I learned that writing is not always original and that that is acceptable. Writing is always changing with the times and so are the rules. Because our culture is very involved in assemblage in everyday life like with music or visual art, writing should be as well.
Is this article “successful” according to the criteria you defined earlier? If so, how? If not, why not?
Yes , this writing is considered successful in my opinion because it influenced a group of people who were interested in reading what the authors had to say about this specific topic. Obviously it influenced this class because we all had to read and respond to it.
Has your understanding of writing changed as a result of engaging with Johnson-Eilola and Selber's article?Why or why not?
I don't think my understanding of writing has really changed, but I definitely have a new perspective now. This topic wasn't something I had spent much time thinking about, but now I have my own thoughts and opinions on how it affects the composition community and it may influence my writing in the future.
Do you want to revise your list of key terms based on this reading? Explain what you would revise (or not) and why (not).
The only thing I would add is assemblage. Nothing is truly new or original, so anything written is an assembly of some other writing.
Writing defined in the simplest terms is the act of composing text. Writing has a vast array of uses and mediums and styles; originally, writing was taught to me as a way of communication. Over time however, you find that writing is a much more dynamic concept.
ReplyDeleteSuccess is an extremely relative term in the field of writing. While one person may be content to have written solely for one's own entertainment (like keeping a personal diary) another person may find that they don’t feel "successful" in writing until an audience has given them feedback and approval.
I see myself as a novice, very minimalistic writer. I have been told that I have a tendency to be too blunt when writing and that my language was not artistic enough. As someone who has always been inclined to get straight to the point this was confusing to me.
1) Language
2) Style
3) Communication
4) Expression
5) Coherency
(After the reading)
In the article, Selber and Johson-Eilola argue that plagiarism is not an entirely negative thing. The main argument was that when plagiarism occurs other ideas about the subject may come to light or that things could thought of in a new way.
I learned that plagiarism is harder to define than I originally thought. Albeit outright copying is obviously wrong, the argument the authors made was more than sound that there are advantages to "copying" work.
This article is successful according to my aforementioned conditions of success; the authors released their work meaning that they were personally satisfied with it.
My understanding of writing did change, but not drastically. Selber and Johson-Eilola did present new arguments in their article, however nothing that changed my original outlook on the subject.
I would not revise my list of terms based on this reading. However, the article change which words I would argue are the most important to from "Language" to "Coherency" and "Expression"
-Nicole Kane