Template is a Four Letter Word

The idea of identifying a standard for Academic paper writing was discussed in our 30 group. The idea was brought up, if we could simply create a work sheet or “Template.” That would not only aid the students in our tutoring classes with “Structure,” but would give them key areas to focus on when work shopping papers of the other students. Later bringing up the idea in the class discussion, we found out how flawed our thoughts were and instructed in the error of our ways. Something along the lines we were conformist to a conventional standard that is essentially built on and around restrictive concepts of writing academic papers, that disallows creativity and at best is a malfunctioning generic structure put into to place by Satan and/or Hitler. The 5 paragraph paper format for some time now has been the standard for academic writing structure.
The proof of the need for a better system was the fact we wanted a single template in the first place. The students in our tutoring classes have more than one instructor for their writing classes. We were hearing confusion from the students in the form of comparing requirements for their assignments of “Compare and Contrast papers” (We were also informed of the non-existence of this form), but hearing the diversity of definition, structure, and emphasis we felt if we had one form the playing field would at least be evened out. The next point was to understand there is a way, but continued trust in the 5 paragraph was not the answer.
Before the actual method would be given, an article would need to be read first Activity Theory and Its Implication for Writing Instruction by David R. Russell. The idea of how Activity Theory is understood is to realize there are many different departments here at Chico State and in those departments’ specifics that divide them from the other departments; such as language, research strategy, terminology, and many other specifics and differences. Just as we discovered our students had different instructions and different needs from each instructor, meaning a template would only represent our ideas of a 5 paragraph paper, but not meet the requirements of that particular instructor and/or department. Russell gave a metaphor to show how this template, although a conventional standard of academic writing for years, fails to take in the needs of each department. Russell’s explanation had to do with ball handling, a person learns how to throw, field, hit, and pitch a baseball. The baseball is like the standard 5 paragraph paper, it works well for the English Departments of Baseball (For the sake of the argument), but when the Anthropology department needs a ball for their game of Four-Square the tool of the baseball is not going to work and neither are the skills throwing, pitching, hitting, and fielding going to help the Anthropologists have what they need to play their game. In order to achieve what is needed for the Anthro bunch, a bigger softer red ball will be needed to get that highly interesting game of four-square going.
A common place of writing would need to be in place, it would need to be easily adaptable to each department, and still all of the department’s specific requirements would be met. An article by Mark Wiley The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (and Why We Need to Resist), gives us a method that meets these requirements. The Method is that of Jane Schaffer’s, which by design is more succinct and according to the article “Schaffer claims this format replicates what is found in high scoring essays on district wide tests…”(pg62). If the method is seen as no different as the old standard and it is easily adaptable to each department, then there may commonality after all.