The One Time I Got Hit in the Face with a Golf Club

Recalling upon childhood is a painful experience, mentally and, well, physically. During this trip to my childhood, I am reminded about an event that involves my older brother. He decided to be a very athletic human being one day, which he is typically not described as when first met because he was a very clumsy child. He had just learned how to play baseball and decided to practice his newly found skill with a new and shiny bat. Well, he was swinging this “bat” around, which normal people might call a golf club, and my father decided to heighten his enthusiasm by throwing him a baseball to hit; but the club was a tad too thin and heavy for a young child to completely control. He missed the ball, lost his balance, and swayed to the right, which made the club smack into the face of the most precious little daughter (me). What I am trying to get at is that his idea of a bat translated into anything that was long; however, a children’s bat is much lighter and shaped differently for maximal impact when hitting the ball. Even though my father thought it would be cute to encourage his son’s interest in the sport, my brother’s initial generalization about the bat set him up to lose his balance and eventually harm one little angel.

To be honest, there was only one main idea from Russell’s “Activity Theory and Its Implications for Writing Instruction” that I could actually grasp:

“Like the handling of balls, the writing of genres is “generalizable” to the extent that written text is handled in similarly ways for similar object(ive)s… there is no autonomous, generalizable skill or set of skills called “writing” which can be learned and then applied to all genres/activities. As one becomes adept at more and more activities that require writing and hence at writing more genres, it is more likely (but by no means certain) that one will be able to master a new genre more quickly” (11)

Russell defines writing as something that cannot be generalized. Like the variety of balls or, at least in my example, bats, writing cannot be used across varying fields of studies and requirements. A professional baseball player cannot automatically become a professional (enter sport here) player from day to day; one needs to practice to maintain or even initially create any skill in the field. Well, the same goes for writing. I have a ton of experience writing for English courses; however, if someone asked me to write an academic science or mathematical paper, I would probably fail. Needless to say, I would eventually be able to obtain the vocabulary and other knowledge needed to complete said paper, but it would take some practice in the field and mentoring from a knowledgeable source to do so. Before reading Russell’s article, I did not cross my mind that there are differences in writing styles across majors and careers. I never really had to deal with any other subject in writing (other than that in my English major). But, I had never really struggled with my writing assignments because I learned how to “properly” structure them.

With the debate on if structure, or a set structure across all domains of writing, works, I fall in the neutral standpoint. This is because I do not have enough experience in writing to take a side. Wiley’s “The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (and Why We Need to Resist)” presents both sides to the argument on whether or not formulaic writing should be taught in schools. This formula includes very specific breakdowns of each paragraph, which relates to something I was taught in a high school level English course, and even some lower college level courses. A critique about it states:

“To develop as writers, students must develop a repertoire of strategies for dealing effectively with various writing tasks presented to them in different situations. They must also learn to make choices about genre, content, structure, organization, and style; and they must learn to hone their judgments about the effects of the choices they make as writers” (64)

This quote (and this entire article) made me question my standpoint even further when regarding teaching formulaic writing in my future classrooms. As an English major, I agree with the critique. I was not able to find my writing voice until I reached the part in my educational career where my course load became major specific; however, my major is English. It just so happened that I chose to continue my educational career with the same style of writing that typically follows what is taught through formulaic writing. Even if I was taught to follow to the general five-paragraph essay format, I learned how to adapt it to add more creative freedom, yes that includes “genre, content, structure, organization, and style,” in my writing. But, as a person that hated English in high school and through the required courses in my junior college, I disagree with this critique. Formulaic writing allowed my teachers to provide their classroom, full of people in different fields of interest, with a general (back to that word) vocabulary and structure to produce a well-written essay that provided minimal confusion on when and where to place quotes and analyze these quotes. I will say that these formats did take out any creativity when formatting an essay, but the students were never required to follow the guidelines to a tee.

When thinking about the students in my English 30 internship class, I believe that they are currently being grasped by both hands and toggled to both sides of this argument. On one hand, we are teaching them that they are able to vary their writing styles to their specific assignment. In addition to this, we are aware that their writing styles will differ as they enter the time in their educational careers where required general education courses end and they can start to really focus on whatever their major is, which none of them answered “English” to when asked. On the other hand, the assignment guidelines they are being given by their English 130 professors have such specific rules and formats. They are lacking (for the most part) the general vocabulary and knowledge needed to understand what is being asked of them, which I gathered from the reoccurring problems they address in their already graded papers. Again, I do not have enough experience in different formats of writing to have a standpoint in this debate; however, I could see benefits from providing them with a very basic format to follow until they feel comfortable enough to skew away from it. It would be like providing them with the baseball bat until they feel comfortable enough to pick up that golf club, while keeping all other children away from them as they swing.