Composition writing in faculties has been a concern in the education sector. It has been noted that there has been a distinction in how composition writing is taught in schools. Some of the scholars such as Teller, argue that teaching composition has been done all incorrect in schools. He further argues that children don’t revise their composition so as to enhance their skills which has resulted in a minimal or zero improvements of the writing skills. Contrary to the argument, scholars such as Stewart(2016), argue that composition has been taught accurately in schools. The author contradicts with Teller’s argument. Stewart argues that students do revise in order to improve their writing. In the want to identify how composition is taught, this paper seeks to analyze the arguments of the author’s Teller and Stewart about how teaching composition in schools is done.
To begin with, in Tellers article, “Are we teaching Composition all wrong”, is an essay that should considerably be revised due to the underlying basis of the arguments and personal experience. According to Teller (2016), the compositionists lay under pedagogical orthodoxy. In the argument, the author depicts that the composition courses should be a process and not a product as predicted by compositionist. In addition, students should handle complex tasks other than past topics. Writing and adhering instructions should also be implemented in the course. In the analysis, the author notes that students fail to revise.Writers often make rhetorical decisions which are based on the target audience and results to substantial revision. In the current courses, the substantial revision does not exist. Contrary to the argument ,in ‘ No we’re not teaching composition “all wrong” Stewart(2016), argues that students do revise the drafts as long as they have the necessary tools and the time to identify and rectify the errors in the draft.
Additionally, the revision time is intensive. The process of revision should be consistency and uninterrupted but with the assistance of a teacher where necessary.According to my opinion, Teller(2016), has failed to provide an evidence of the given assumption about failure of the student to revise. With regard to the arguments, being in a teaching profession, students learn to gain knowledge and the process of learning involves correcting mistakes. Hence, as the students aim to be knowledgeable and probably pass the test, revision is mandatory as it is the only way a student can improve the composition writing skills.
Teller(2016), further argues that in the peer workshops, students often share their feedback on their different works. However, despite the confidence to share the feedback, the suggestions of the classmates are ignored. In this case, the revision is not done in accordance with the view of their peers. The end result is that sharing feedback becomes unhelpful. Further, the author gives an example that a paper may have a good thesis but lacks an argument. The aim of the peer workshops is to enable the students to gain insights with regard to writing compositions. In the analysis, Teller(2016), depicts that the workshops enable the students to gain confidence which is contrary to the objective of the workshops.
Additionally, Stewart(2016), argues that the goal of the peer workshops is to assist the students to read their own articles, which must be consistent with effectiveness. In addition, the students use the feedback in productive ways. There is partial agreement from both writers that students do revise, which is facilitated by the workshops. Further, it is in agreement that the workshops boost the confidence of the students. A student reading the articles for themselves in presence of other students is a sign of confidence. Sharing of feedback is essential in developing the skills of the students. Practically, most students often admit that they are bad writers. However, the writing skills can be improved through practice.The teachers can assist the students in improving their skills especially through using the feedback from the peers in doing the revision.
The second observation by Teller(2016), is that the students fail to use the argumentative structures which they require to support their ideas. He further decries the incorporation of critical reading skills and argumentative structures. While investigating the issue, students were given a set of readings whereby the discussion turned out to be interesting as some of the students struggled to understand some essays. The essays had unified arguments which made them unclear. According to Stewart(2016), it is ironical to argue that students fail to use argumentative structures. He argues that argumentative structures go hand in hand with argumentative writing. However, the two authors agree partially that, in writing, themed content all over the essay should be avoided. Despite the partial agreement, Stewart (2016) ,believes that practicing writing makes writing easier and better. It is plausible to say that in order to develop good writing skills, practicing is essential and should be consistence. There is the need for collaboration between the teacher and student in order to have an effective learning process.
In the need to improve how writing composition is taught in schools the two authors have rendered different recommendations. According to Stewart (2016), students require writing continuously in order to perfect their writing skills. Feedback is not necessarily important but practicing is. The author insists on consistence wring as it enhances the development of ideas. The recommendation differs from Tellers’(2016) whereby he recommends that students should have their feedback regarding their essays in order to rectify the mistakes made in the essays.
Stewart(2016), argues that students should interact with ideas.Ideas are better as they assist in the development of writing skills rather than an argument which only skims on the ideas. Having to learn the technical skills is more important than having to write as an art. The argument is contrary to Tellers(2016), who focuses on writing argument other than concentrating on complex texts based on ideas. Additionally, he demonstrates that not all papers require peer reviews. Some of the papers need to be put aside to start over. However, Stewart(2016), provides a controversial idea that to perfect writing skills, students should be mentored and be guided on how to conduct the peer reviews.
In conclusion, after the analysis of both arguments, it is plausible to say that, in order to improve the writing skills, there is need to incorporate a number of factors. For instance, students should practice writing not only argumentatively but also from ideas. Teachers also have a vital role to play in guiding the students on how to review the drafts as well as following up on the progress of the student by providing feedback. Students should also understand that writing is a continuous process that requires determination and effort in order to improve on the wiring skills.
Stewart,E.M.(2016).No we’re not teaching composition “all wrong” The Chronicle of Higher Education, Retrieved from http://ww.chronicle.com/Article/No-We-re-Not-Teaching-Composition/238468
Teller,J.R.(2016).Are we teaching composition all wrong?The Chronicle of Higher Education, Retrieved from http://ww.chronicle.com/article/Are-We-Teaching-Composition/237969