k. This is not my entire post, and really is not at the heart of the substance of my post, but I just have to say something!As an educator the idea that a student has the "right" to write poorly or go off topic just seems wrong. It haven't read these chapters yet, but it sort of strikes me as similar to when people say they have a "right to their own opinion" when what they are arguing is not a matter of opinion, but actually one of fact and can be proven untrue. Their claim to such a "right" is based on fallacious logic.
While good/bad writing and on/off topic IS a matter of opinion, it becomes less so once students step into the classroom. How else can a teacher evaluate his students? I just get this bizarre image of someone being handcuffed and brought into the classroom and read their rights. Then, when they fail the course they argue, "I have the right to write badly!" I'm hoping as I sit down to read this book I come to a better understanding of Spandel's ultimate goal.
Having looked over the preface and taken a sneak peek of the other chapters, it seems she is hovering between rights and needs. I agree students should feel free to make mistakes. I just really do not like the trend/idea, especially with creative writing, that there is no real standard of quality. (What does it mean to you?, etc.) The question is, how DO we evaluate?
Also, with with Spandel I'm running up against that problem, once again, that these ideas don't seem quite practical. I think it might be sort of cool to imagine the inside of a pencil. I've also been in lots of classes where students were able to choose their topics and it didn't seem to make much of a difference either way. I'd drop dead if I gave an assignment that made my students run through the grass singing "Tra-la-la" and begging for pen and paper. Maybe I'll figure it out and one day they'll make a movie about me and Michelle Pfeiffer will play me. Oh, wait. They already did that.
I do like the idea of letting students try to choose something that holds personal value for them. I'm not saying I'm against that. But I also think that we can give them topics/tools they may not think of. This might help them discover something. Maybe it's just that I'm getting more and more frustrated as we get to the end of the program and we keep talking about all these solutions that seem to contradict each other.
On the other side of the spectrum we have Williams. I think it's just his writing style. The tone or something. He seems really judgmental and negative. Damn. I absolutely loved hearing about the multi-genre concept after he trashed the idea of combining literature and expository writing, which I thought was completely bogus when I read it last week. And that's the thing about Williams, it wasn't presented as his theory, it was put forth as the only option. That's something I was told never to do when making an argument because it is a major turn off to your audience.
I will definitely put something together that is multi-genre because I feel like it's a low-pressure situation for students to try out different forms of creative writing. Their entire grade isn't riding on whether they can write an awesome poem, etc. and I think that will help them. It will also give them an automatic topic. However, I think I will make it mandatory that my students include some formal expository writing along with the project.
