An Angry But Informative Overview

As someone who's spent the last 25 years in the worlds of business and then stay-home motherhood, it was fascinating to get an overview of everything I've missed in writing instruction. What puzzles me is that Williams so often seems angry, even in the most purely descriptive portions. Since several of the instruction methods sound worthwhile or at least legit, I couldn't tell where the anger was coming from -- until the last few pages. Williams is angry because student writing skills have been in a continuing downward spiral for some years. Also, I get the impression that the teaching of writing was a hot topic in the 60s, 70s and 80s, but isn't so much any more. If that's true, it's a real shame. To me, writing is a vital communication tool, and communication is an essential skill for every aspect of life. To tackle work, health and family problems, one must be able to ask the right questions and understand what others are saying.

Getting back to the teaching methods described by Williams, I found something to like in most of them. I think teachers would do well to combine them rather than using one method exclusively.

Williams seems dismissive of "Current Traditional" but I believe studying good literature is important. How can one learn to be a good writer without studying good books? I also think there's a place for teaching correct grammar to students who don't know it because poor grammar can be a real impediment in school, work and social life. The "New Rhetoric" method of writing in stages seems pragmatic. As a liberal arts grad and business writer, I have been through those stages many times. And writing, like any task, is less overwhelming when broken down into smaller steps.

"Romantic Rhetoric" might be a good way to jump-start the writing process for kids in poor neighborhoods who are weak in writing skills but have had many dramatic, traumatic life experiences that they can write about. I also like the idea of WAC because I think writing papers in social sciences and hard sciences is a good way to master those disciplines and at the same time practice writing skills. The "Social Theoretical" model seems helpful in getting students out of the ivory tower and into the real world -- and solving the real-world problems I mentioned in my intro.

The only method I didn't see much good in is Decon. I concede that distinctions between "good" writing and "bad" writing are always going to be somewhat arbitrary. But of what use is this truth for students who need to learn how to write?