“I, You, and It” Response

James Moffett describes four different types of communication – inner verbalization, outer vocalization, correspondence, and formal writing. He goes on to discuss how these can force us to view/verbalize/write about the same situation differently, with different attention to detail, depending on our audience. With children, their writing will progress in the same way, moving from concrete to abstract, from self to world.

Moffett also states that students should not be asked to do so much writing on reading. “What most frequently freezes the student at one end of the abstractive spectrum is too much writing about reading.” (pg. 26) Moffett goes on to say on pg. 27, “On the same grounds, I am leery of asking the student to read about writing.” This goes against almost everything else I know about writing with students! I have always been under the impression that incorporating writing with reading was essential, as they are two sides of the same coin. I think Moffett challenges us to think about the writing that we assign to students in a different way. He explains his position better in this selection:

“Rather than assign book reports and essays on books, I would encourage the student to incorporate into his essays of generalization illustrations and ideas drawn from his reading and to mix these with his own experiences and observations; in other words, get him to create the classes into which he can fit people and actions drawn from both books and life.” (pg. 27)

This is something I strive to do in my classroom. Incorporate my students’ background, experiences, knowledge, into what we are learning. I think Moffett is right. Incorporating facts (from books) with life (from experiences) will make the assignment have a much more powerful impact and learning experience for our students.