Thanks to all who posted a summary and response to Flower and Hayes' cognitive process model. On Friday, you'll meet with your peer tutoring group to further explore your role as "collaborative planners" with your peer tutoring clients.
In order to prepare for thoughtful consideration of how collaborative invention happens, I have asked you to read a short excerpt from Linda Flower's 1998 textbook, Problem-solving Strategies for Writing In College and Community, which I handed out in class today.
On several of your blogs, I have posted comments and questions about the role of invention and discovery in the cognitive process model. As you may recall, David Bartholomae critiques the cognitive process model of invention as being a strictly cognitive/mental process, one that happens outside the act of writing. Does Flower's 1998 advice on collaborative planning (see handout) seem to be moving closer to Barthomae's notion of "locating subjects in a field of discourse"? That is, does Flower still seem to locate invention in the mind of the writer (i.e., as cognitive problem-solving), or does her later work seem to locate the problem of invention in a discourse community? I invite you to respond here, or to post a comment to one of your classmates' blogs.
On Friday, you'll share weekly reports and add Flower and Hayes and Bartholomae to your revised version of the Tutors' Guide to Comp Studies. See you then!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Collaboration and Individual Authorship
The short excerpt from Flowers text book describes a very useful way to work on your paper with the help of a “supporter” She is talking about collaboration with a peer on your paper. This she explains does not mean that two people work on constructing the sentences together; it means you talk out the ideas. How it works is, you have a planer (the author of the paper) and a supporter and you set together and talk about the planner’s paper. The planner’s job is to explain his or her ideas, talk about any problems or questions they are having with the paper. The planner’s main goal is to describe the “key points” and reasons for writing the paper. Basically set an agenda of what you would like to have discussed about your paper and then talk. The role of the supporter is to “draw out ideas and hold up a mirror to the planner’s own thoughts.” Be an active listener, help the writer, i.e. the planner be able to say what he or she really wants to say.
Flowers is saying in this text book that when one collaborates in this way it is possible to achieve a better end product then when working alone. Flowers argues that the product come out of the discussion, the ideas may be individually formed by the writer, but by collaborating it turns into a form of revision by a skilled writer. It’s like a therapy session for the writers’ paper. What I mean by this is, the supporter just by listening and saying things such as, “What I hear you are saying is that___” the writer can see his viewpoints in another light, and see its imperfections.
Regarding the question posed, I hesitate to answer because I’m not sure I fully grasp what it is I am being asked. I can only add that Flower’s idea on collaboration fits into her later model of writing. I think that with collaboration you have many of the processes and steps described in her cognitive theory. You have the planning out of ideas, which would be the “task environment” where audience and topic are discussed. Then there is the “writers’ long term memory” which basically is the gained knowledge on the topic, which is also part of the conversation in a collab session .And finally the writing and revision process all of which are also used in the conversation between the planner and supporter. So I would say she is saying the collab session would be part of the discourse community. But as I said, I don’t know I understand it all.
thank you stephen. i have thoroughly explored the depths of your cognitive process; and it turn, discovered something about the world inside itself.
Post a Comment