Note:  Transferring text frequently causes the loss of formatting.  While I have attempted to catch the more obvious ones (like paragraph breaks), the point of posting the material to the web is to make it accessible, not "perfect."

Articles are ordered by student, alphabetically, on this page, but alphabetized citations below are linked to the specific reviews.

Hannah Carman

Cappello, Mary, “Can Creative Writing Be Taught?”  Teachers & Writers  36 (2004) : 19-25.

Fletcher, Ralph. A Writer's Notebook: Unlocking The Writer Within You. New York: Harper Trophy, 1996.

Ralph Fletchers book, A Writer's Notebook: Unlocking the Writer Within You is a great book that gives detailed descriptions on what should be included in a writer's notebook. Fletcher opens each chapter with a personal story that relates to the topic of the chapter. Also, in between every few chapters Fletcher's book contains responses from prominent authors on their writers notebook- what they write down in it, how it helps their writing, and how they organize their notebook.

In this book all the chapters deal with certain things that could and should be included in the notebook.  In the introduction Fletcher explains that a writer notebook is, "different form a diary or reading journal. It gives you a place to write down what you notice and don't want to forget" (Fletcher 5). Fletcher goes on to explain that the notebook should reflect a person's personality. Chapter three deals with writing small. Fletcher say that to write small in the notebook one should," Use the notebook to jot down the important little details that you notice or hear about" (Fletcher 24). These details will bring your story to life.  Another important chapter dealing with the notebook is chapter four. This chapter is about seed ideas, which mean all the little ideas you have for writings. The writer's notebook is a great place to keep these.  Fletcher says that the notebook is a kind of incubator. It is a place to keep your ideas safe and warm till they grow into bigger ideas. Notable author Paul Fleischman, a Newberry Medal Award winner, says that he keeps all kinds of ideas in his notebook- character, descriptions, and titles- among other things. He says that it could be year before he takes an idea from his notebook to develop it.

I also liked how he had three-award winning authors discuss the use of notebooks in their writings. When students read these sections they will know that the best of the best use notebooks, and that it is not a waste of time. One author, Louise Borden, explained that her notebook contained photos, quotes, and newspaper clippings. I especially like that she mentioned the newspaper clippings idea. If encouraged students will be keeping up on current events and using real world drama in their writings.

Laura Crook

Strickland, Dorothy S., et al.  “Teaching Writing in a Time of Reform.”  The Elementary School Journal.  101.4  (2001):  385-397.

Education reforms have led to increased teacher accountability, and, as described in this article, “teaching to the test”--in this case teaching to writing standards that have been created--can be at odds with goals writing teachers may have for their students and with what is known about learning and teaching writing.  The history of reform in writing instruction is traced, and current reforms in writing instruction are discussed.  Teachers have to form a balance between what they want for their students and what the standards require, all in consideration of what is known about writing instruction.

In the past, writing was consistently viewed as separate and subordinate to reading, but increased attention to writing in state and national standards has led to increased attention on writing instruction.  Although reading and writing are interrelated processes, they are still often taught and tested differently.  Viewing writing as a process instead of a product--and a recursive process instead of a linear process--is still a fairly new idea, although research and studies on how writers write and what writers do support this idea.

There has to be a way to score students to determine if they are meeting the requirements indicated in state and national standards.  Writing has moved away from being judged based on multiple-choice tests and into more direct assessment.  This article mainly talks about writing prompts being used to judge student’s achievements, but writing portfolios are also used.  To judge student’s actual writings, rubrics are created, and these rubrics are what can create problems (but also benefits) for teachers.  All too often teachers fall into the pitfall of “teaching to the test,” and, thus, writing teachers end up focusing all of students’ writings towards these rubrics.  Creativity, experimentation, and risk taking in students’ writings dwindle because students become focused on meeting the requirements of the rubrics teachers give them.  A similar problem occurs with the writing pieces themselves:  if certain genres of writing are not tested, like poetry, then those genres do not receive as much attention in the classroom.  Additionally, since each subject has standards, teachers may view each subject separately, which results in writing not being integrated across the curriculum:  writing occurs in English class, and nowhere else.  To solve these problems, writing teachers must find a balance.

As a former Kentucky high school student, I tried to analyze what I was reading in this article with my own experience with Kentucky’s (and my school’s) writing standards.  The portfolio requirements definitely limited the types of writing students completed:  the goal seemed to be to meet the basic requirements for the portfolio and then stop writing.  For me (and many other students), this meant that once I had a personal narrative to meet the personal expressive writing requirement and a short story and a poem to meet the literary writings requirement, I did not need to work on any other kind of writing.  The last time I can remember writing a memoir was in 9^th grade, and I have never written a play--I did not need them for the portfolio, so there was no need to write them.  Even though portfolios were scored in 12^th grade, teachers at all grade levels seemed to know what 12^th grade English teachers would have their students write, and, thus, the English teachers at all the other grade levels had students work on the same types of writing.  Portfolio requirements resulted in less experimentation and risk taking in genres and in the writings themselves.  As for students writing in all content areas, this was accomplished by requiring one transactive piece from every class in subject areas besides English.  This, too, was a result of the portfolio requirements:  we need two transactive pieces; we need two pieces from subject areas outside of Enlgish--problem solved.  The goals of writing portfolios are sound, but there are obviously several implementation problems.

Ashley Gore

Romano, Tom. Blending Genre, Altering Style: Writing Multigenre Papers.  Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc., 2000. 

While Tom Romano attended the Reading and Writing program during the summer of 1997, he witnessed a presentation that had a deep impact on him.  The presentation differed from the rest because it infused poetry, music, dance, a projected painting, and an Irish flag backdrop.  It also influenced a strong emotional response from Romano.  Thus, he set out to formulate a way in which students can produce the same impact and from this, the multigenre paper was born. 

A multigenre paper:

From this definition, two types of multigenre papers can be written: the purely emotional one based on a topic that is close to the writer or an informative one based on research that will have some form of bibliography.  It is hard to grasp what all goes into and is expected out of this kind of writing until one reads it.  Thus, Romano includes five different multigenre papers from various age levels.  Each student has their own individual topic in which they have personally selected and invested themselves into doing.  Then, Romano gives different ways in which to teach and plan out the teaching of the multigenre paper.  He suggests ways to break up the genres into mini lessons and writing workshops. He also includes hints and other trouble shooting from him and other teachers on what to look out for and what works best.  Because it is a blend of genres that is up to the student’s discretion, grading can be difficult thus Romano includes many types of grading scales that can be applied.  To drive home the greatness of the multigenre paper, Romano even incorporates testimonials through out from students and teachers.

I am very glad that I randomly choose this book for the book review. I love the multigenre paper.  By letting the students pick the topic and to which genres to include (ranging from plays, short stories, and poetry to photographs, drawings, and cartoons), they become invested and take more ownership in the paper.  I was moved by all five of the papers I read.  The emotion and creativity of them amazed me.  I feel that the original motive to create the multigenre paper of having an emotional and creative impact on the reader has been fulfilled by Romano. 

Jeanette Gravil

Journaling in its various forms is a means for recording personal thoughts, but Fletcher urges the reader to stop, breath, take time and look at the many advantages journaling has to offer. Take a close look at what moves you, reminding you that notebooks offer us a place to freeze important memories and striking events. Ask yourself what matters? Fletcher says the notebook is an open invitation to care about the world, and helps to bring those concerns into the full light of consciousness.

Journaling encourages ones self to evoke conversations with the self, another person, or even unpredictable goddess who taps a writer on the shoulder and breathes inspiration into the soul, which Fletcher talks about. He encourages us to write regularly because it acts as a wake up call reminding us to keep our senses alert. Writing down small details and being able to refer back to them, he said leads you to new material you never knew you had. Breathe in, take a risk, and trust yourself, writing what you see and feel.

As your journaling experiences grow, do not be afraid to experiment, we are not perfect, and our journals do not have to be either, they are a reflection of ourselves. If your sole reason for journaling is emotional, then write when your emotions overwhelm you and you need a break to gain perspective, but if you write for creativity, then you should write everyday in order to develop your own style and thoughts. Writing everyday will allow us to form effective journaling techniques He refers to the notebook as a compost heap.

.Transformation- The writer’s notebook is like a compost heap because it’s all about change. I love how he refers to the common ingredients of the notebook simmering in a slow hot stew until it transform into something new and valuable.

.Fertility- Compost heaps and notebooks share a fertility that is ongoing and mysterious.

. Randomness- Again the writer’s notebook is like the compost heap without separate compartments just throwing stuff in, no matter what it is.

.Wait time- He talks about the compost heap and the patience to wait to transform itself into high class soil. The writer’s notebook often requires the same kind of patience. Pause. Hold. Wait.

This is just one example of Fletcher’s thoughts about the notebook and how he has a way of pulling you in with his words and thoughts about notebooks. As you and your journals grow, Fletcher believes you will figure out what works best for you, how to organize your thoughts and develop techniques unique to your writing style as he did his own.

Finding your own private space without interruptions helps us to unlock our subconscious, filling our journals with interesting insight. This is what Fletcher was talking about when he talks about breathing out. Breathing out is intended to suggest the notebook as an  ideal place where you can take all the  ideals and thoughts you have collected and allow your creative writing side to flow smoothly. Breathe out and take that colorful language, that slice of life or the echoes of the past that Fletcher suggests and use them to enhance your writing living life to the fullest through your journal writings.

Fletcher quotes, “This book is for new writers as well as those who may have once loved to write but have lost the spark along the way. It will help you find a natural rhythm for using a notebook and in the process start living the life of a writer.

I found this book intriguing and insightful. Fletcher asks you to trust that inner voice and interpret new thoughts and dreams through journaling. I also liked how Fletcher uses his writing as a way to tell about his life, by creating a picture of his life, showing his feeling and views about life. He does all of this through his journaling, showing us the many uses of journaling. Journaling serves as a haven for new ideals, and offers the writer something that no one else can in its own unique style all its own.

I loved this book because it reminds me of my own personal struggles of writing. I was writer who loved to write, but was destroyed inside by one teacher, when I was young and fragile. I am happy to report that I overcome my fears of writing though journal writing. Now, I may not be the best writer, but as least I’m writing again and that’s all that matters. I have learned I can’t please everyone and you should trust yourself first.

Adriane Hardin

Romano, Tom. Clearing the Way: Working With Teenage Writers. Portsmouth, NH. Heinemann, c1987.

Tom Romano shoots straight from the hip in his pseudo how to guide on teaching writing in secondary classrooms. He encourages the reader to provide a laid back classroom experience for students, where they can write freely and not worry about fulfilling every blank on a holistic scoring guide. Although some of Romano’s ideas tend to be a bit idealistic, he has still provided an excellent resource for teachers of writing.

The book is divided into twelve chapters and topics range from the very serious, “The crucial role of conferencing” to the less serious “Cutting loose”. One chapter consists of Romano pleading with writing teachers, entitled “Please write”.

Romano encourages the reader to work honestly with students of writing. But he first and foremost encourages teachers to be students of writing themselves. He tells his reader that he believes writing teachers should not only practice writing themselves, in their free time (as well as reading) but that they should do writing exercises with their students. This chapter is one in which Romano seems to be a bit idealistic about time constraints in the classroom.

In Chapter 8 Romano discusses the ins and outs of grading writing. He emphasizes that teachers should emphasize the positive aspects of all student writing. He also believes teachers should have students write a great deal of assignments that are not to be graded: journal entries, web clusters, outlines, things of that sort. This is another part of the text where Romano underestimates the time constraints of the classroom.

The text is full of examples of student writing: blurbs, short essays and poetry of all kinds. But chapter 12 is made up of mostly these sorts of examples. This chapter is about creative energy and seems to be one of the most entertaining in the book. In this chapter Romano discusses some of his most rewarding experiences in the classroom.

Diverse students require diverse lessons. Though a widely-accepted fact among those within the field of education, it remains an issue that is commonly under-addressed within many classrooms.  However, Robert Stevens of Pennsylvania State University set out to tackle one area of this very problem by initiating a project to create a multifaceted middle school literacy program that focused on the needs and strengths of early adolescents within urban middle schools.

Utilizing five middle schools, with a total of 3,916 predominantly minority, at-risk students in grades 6-8, Stevens implemented his Student Team Reading & Writing (STRW) program in two of them, using the other three as comparison schools (p.150).  The goal of his project was to compare traditional teaching techniques against the effectiveness of his innovative STRW program, which: 1) uses good literature as the basis for reading instruction, 2) provides students with meaningful follow-up activities for what they have read, 3) focuses instruction in language arts on writing, 4) integrates reading & English classes, & 5) uses cooperative learning processes and classroom structure (pp. 140-142).

In essence, the STRW program blends reading with writing and consists of three primary parts: literature-related activities (comprehension of the selection, word mastery activities...), direct instruction in reading comprehension strategies, and selection-related writing (writing process, writing concept lessons …) (p. 142). As well, the students perform all of these areas in teams, with all activities following a consistent pattern of involved teacher presentation, team practice, independent practice, peer pre-assessment and individual accountability (p. 143).

Ultimately, utilizing the California Achievement Test as a uniform post-test, the two middle schools using Steven’s innovative STRW program posted “significantly higher” scores than the other three control schools in the study (p. 154). Requiring students to actively participate and process what they read and learn, the STRW program promotes greater long-term information retention than traditional methods of literacy education. Consequently, supporting Steven’s initial hypothesis, the use of his integrated reading & writing system led to undeniable gains in achievement for at-risk, urban middle school students.

From beginning to end, Steven’s article does a tremendous job of giving evidence necessary to support his claim that his system of literacy education is more effective than most standard methods in use. Most impressive is how incredibly he sets up his experiment to eliminate virtually any factor that could skew the accuracy or validity of his results.  From selecting schools with teachers of the same experience level, to pre-testing to make sure all the schools began at or near the same scoring mark, Steven’s meticulous attention to detail makes the legitimacy his project’s outcome virtually undeniable.

In addition to having an air-tight setup to his experiment, Steven’s supports his reading and writing strategies with effective examples and procedures for carrying them out within a classroom.  Without these vital steps included (which he does to a tee), the results of his experiment would be of little value to any classroom teacher.  However, Steven’s stayed focused on what was truly important to the article, which was providing educators with the tools they need to implement STRW within their school.

Though a minor complaint, the only thing I would have liked to have seen Steven’s do is provide the information about the number, and types, of students and schools participating in the experiment more towards the beginning of the article than the end. I believe this information would have been helpful in providing a more precise image of the type of students his program targets. Furthermore, it would better allow the readers to see the even level of all the schools at the beginning of the experiment, thus making the results of the experiment, and the success of his program, hit home even harder.

This article explores our country’s educational habits of holding teachers accountable for test scores and student academic achievement – and how they are not accountable for treating students like human beings and accepting/embracing their differences.  The authors clearly ask why “federal and state mandates for accountability result in what teachers know will never work:  a foolish emphasis on sameness” (390).

The first point the article makes is a shocking one – they assert “…our schools practice child abuse every day” (391).  Students have rules regarding what they can and cannot do; they are being told, in front of others, that they are lazy and don’t try to succeed; they are unsupported during the time of their life when they should be nurtured the most.  This behavior could be remedied with some training and education.  However, with the new educational buzzword of “accountability” being abused, teachers are in turn abusing their students by focusing on test scores and how well the students perform, not how well they treat their students.  Teachers are constantly held accountable for their students’ performance, which forces stress into the classroom – the idea is that “everyone will be performing above average – or else” (391).  Some states even pay their teachers more according to how well they are able to bring their students up to grade-level norms.  The fact is, though, that half of all students will be below average, and this is quite normal.  The absurdity of trying to teach every child to read at grade level is just as absurd as the idea that every child could be an all-star athlete.  They either have the ability or they don’t.

The article asserts that we are not succeeding in our goal of educating children this way.  In fact, we are doing just the opposite.  We don’t excuse them from doing what they can’t do – we pile on more work and force the students to do it or suffer the consequences.  As the authors compare this combination of schoolwork and homework to 19^th-century sweatshops, it becomes clear that teachers are failing to take into consideration one major fact.  Children are different.  We educators know this to be true, yet we teach all the students the same way, expecting them to operate as though their differences don’t exist or matter.  This emphasis on “sameness” – the same books, the same classes, the same tests, the same instruction, and kids of the same age in the classroom – is forcing students to learn the same way and at the same pace.  Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences tell us that this is inherently wrong; so why do state-mandated curricula seem to ignore the facts?

The Knowles’ ask the question whether the skill of reading classic literature is all that important.  Of course, each child needs to have a solid command of the written word to function successfully in life, yet do all students need exposure to British literature and Elizabethan sonnets?  The authors note that you can’t pick out a slow reader as you walk down the street, nor can you identify a person with a reading disability as you pass them in a crowded mall.  School shouldn’t be such misery for students, for these disabilities evaporate as soon as the students graduate and leave the school building.  They aren’t knocking accountability – just what we teachers are being held accountable for.  They argue that the teachers should be “accountable not for how well their children test in the three R’s, but for how well they function in the three L’s: living without fear or shame, loving themselves and others, and learning about this wonderful world at their own speed and in their own way” (392).

I believe that this article is truthful, and I would love to see our educational system change to better fit the needs of all students.  It would be very difficult to alter the system to which we’ve grown accustomed.  The system we have in place worked for me personally; I was able to make the system work for me, and I enjoyed all the reading and writing, so I was able to learn.  However, others in my own high school, as well as most of my students today, just aren’t able to do the same thing.  It is sometimes frustrating to find that my students don’t have the same appreciation for Shakespeare and Wordsworth, yet they do have appreciation for being treated fairly, exploring their interests, and learning at their own pace, so I try to let them do this as much as my curriculum map will let me.  It’s upsetting that the current educational system we have in place doesn’t allow for much of this personal growth.  We are told to raise CATS scores, to increase portfolio scores, and to cover certain areas of the text – when are we told to teach the child?  That shouldn’t require extra planning or supplemental materials.  It should be what the curriculum is based on, not what can be shoved in if we have time.

The authors of this article state “we teach children that, unless they are successful in school, they are losers.  And we still hold teachers accountable for the failure of children to read.”  I know that when my kids leave me in May, some of them won’t be any better at reading or writing.  Some of them will have failed many quizzes and tests.  Others will have passed my class by the hair of their chins.  But I also know that the majority of them will enter into the world knowing that they have the courage to try new things, that they can love who they are as human beings, and that they can learn what’s interesting to them in their own unique ways – and that is just fine with me.

Slater, Wayne H. and Franklin R. Horstman. “Teaching Reading and Writing to Struggling Middle School and High School Students.” Preventing School Failure 2002 46.4: 163-166. EBSCO Host. Academic Search Premier. WKU Library, Bowling Green. 2 Feb. 2006 < http://www.epnet.com>.

According to this journal article published in Preventing School Failure in 2002, middle and high school students who are struggling readers and writers do not seem to be receiving the necessary instruction in the classroom in order for them to reach the nation’s goal of high literacy for all students.  In fact, when the results of the NAEP 1998 Reading and Writing Report Cards for the Nation and the States were reviewed it was found that most middle and high school students were only performing at or below the basic level in reading at 66 percent for middle school students and 53 percent for high school students as well as 73 percent for middle school students and 78 percent for high school students in writing.  Thus, educators are falling short of reaching the high literacy goal.  In turn, the authors of this article Wayne Slater and Franklin Horstman believe the most effective way to meet students’ literacy needs is to use cognitive strategy instruction in which the students assume greater responsibility for their education by learning how to various strategies to better organize and process information.  Slater and Horstman propose that reciprocal teaching is the cognitive strategy best suited to assist struggling middle and high school readers and writers.

Ultimately, I enjoyed this article because it offers a practical approach for helping struggling middle and high school readers and writers to receive the literacy instruction they need in order to excel in the reading and writing aspects of their lives.  I thought the concept of reciprocal teaching was explained thoroughly as to how it is expected to be used when teaching reading and writing.  I particularly liked how Slater and Horstman showed that when the strategy is used correctly for teaching writing the students will learn how to find the main idea and supporting details of a text, which is often difficult for college students.  However, I think in order to convince me and any other reader that reciprocal teaching is the best cognitive strategy to assist struggling middle and high school readers and writers Slater and Horstman should have provided an example of an instance in a real classroom setting where the strategy was used and it boosted the students’ reading and writing scores and/or performance.  In addition, while I think reciprocal teaching could be an effective method in helping students to become more independent learners and assume responsibility for their learning, I am not completely convinced that this approach would not take the leadership role of the teacher out of his or her hands a little too much.  I think there is a thin line that has to be drawn and Slater and Horstman did not provide enough information as to how to balance the leadership role but at the same time allow the students to progress as individual learners.  I guess what I am saying is that more cautions need to be presented so that teachers now how to handle them should problems arise when they attempt to use reciprocal teaching in the classroom.  Overall, I found the article to be a useful tool to help me in the classroom, and I will probably try to use reciprocal teaching as a method of furthering reading comprehension and writing abilities in the future.

Best, Linda.  “A Practical Discussion about Student Outcomes and Instruction in Introductory Writing Courses.” Journal of Research and Teaching in Developmental Education (1996).

Questions and issues are addressed that frequently arise in discussions about writing instruction and the development of student skills.  The focus is on practical issues with attention being paid to research and theory.

Linda Best’s article is an in-depth look at the principles of effective writing and the fostering of skills development.  By examining the methods of writing instruction within the broad range of goals for students across the curriculum, Best addresses the critical issue of students’ ability to transfer and apply knowledge about writing in a variety of academic fields and contexts.  She points out that the goals for a particular writing course are relative to student writing expectations in other fields of study and to other instructors’ expectations.  Issues surrounding this concept are evident when we find that students may exhibit knowledge about grammar and writing principles, but do not consistently or decisively transfer this information to their own writing or to other subject areas.  The issue also presents itself when it is evident that students are able to revise and edit one particular assignment but are unable to follow through on later works.  Basically, Linda Best reminds the reader that overall student achievement in the skill area is not restricted to a single course.  Her insistence that activities be designed and structured to follow certain principles for learning is clearly expressed.  The article reflects that thinking and offers the belief that guided by those principles, the goals of educators can be achieved while also fostering the development of skills that offer potential for future use and positive growth over time in a variety of subject areas.  The most important principles that can lead to this outcome are the students’ personal connection to course material, the development and nurturing of critical thought, the examination of one’s own writing within the context of writing concepts and also the behaviors of writing that are involved in the process.

I found the article to be highly informative and engaging in the fact that the writer immediately laid out the association between the development of writing and the mastery of other subjects.  This made her ideas and suggestions relative and worthy when further delving into the subject of writing instruction and the need for relevance and partnering amongst faculty.  The fields of writing and other sciences are inextricably linked and I thought that Ms. Best made a number of valid points and suggestions that further that belief.  In particular, the suggestion that many students demonstrate knowledge of writing and yet, are unable to display this in their work highlights a very important problem.  Students’ use of concepts and ideas are so random and can be applied to their writing in a stronger fashion that is more deliberate.  The three types of knowledge that are discussed in the article (declarative, procedural, and self- knowledge) are excellent markers by which to become a better writer and should be further utilized in writing instruction. The article lent an understanding and agreeable approach that I could agree with.  Just as with any pursuit or endeavor, one must be able to recall fundamental principles, adjust and use several strategies and finally, be able to take an introspective look within, in order to gauge one’s learning, achievement and room for growth.

Stephen McCullough

Zinser, William.  Inventing the Truth:  The Art and Craft of Memoir.  New York:  Houghton Mifflin, 1998.

This book gives the reader varying attitudes and viewpoints in regards to writing the memoir.  The angles involved are inputs and analyses from a wide range of authors who have experience in the craft.  Although I virtually read the book in its entirety, I decided to focus on three of the authors that I felt specifically related to me and one whose’ name and works I was familiar with.  That author is Frank McCourt and his work entitled Angela’s Ashes.  McCourt’s book was published in 1996 and was his bleak and dreary account of what it was like to grow up poor and of secondary status in Ireland in the 1930’s.  McCourt explains how he was disillusioned with the constant memorizing and ritualistic processes involved in growing up in an Irish Catholic home and school.  As he says, “You were never encouraged to look at yourself as a future memoirist, never encouraged to look inward.”  He adds that “You were forced to look at yourself from the point of view of the church.”  This flew in the face of the truth that he knew and lived everyday as the son of an alcoholic father and a boy living in an English-dominated region.  McCourt realized at the age of nineteen and upon his arrival in America that he had no self-knowledge, self-esteem or skills.  It was only after a stint in the Army and a short tour in Korea that he was able to enroll at New York University, where he was exposed to the art of writing about something concrete and related to an object from his childhood.  This was the beginning of what he referred to as “becoming more human”.

After McCourt became a teacher himself, he became more curious about his upbringing and found himself relaying to his students the idea of introspection through writing and self-analysis.  Although his students yearned to learn more about him and his obvious Irish background, McCourt explained that he was not able to let go of his fear of touching controversy and shame in his writing until a young African-American lady in one of his classes told him to simply “chill out”.  This, he reported, allowed him to see that he needed to be aware of the emotional truth that he needed to involve in his writing.  Finally, at the age of sixty-four McCourt wrote Angela’s Ashes, which won a Pulitzer Prize.  McCourt explained in the text that he had to get past the questioning and disbelief that he encountered after the publishing of his book.  He added that readers often commented on his remembrance of many small details, thoughts, emotions and episodes that were commonplace in the book.  McCourt implores the reader of the text to do the same and to remember to “never let anybody trip you up on any of the facts of your own life”.

A similar approach was offered up by the author Henry Louis Gates Jr.  In his segment of the text entitled Lifting the Veil, Gates implores the reader to not be afraid of the personal and revealing nature of the memoir.  He does so by revealing the intimate nature of much of his writing detailing what it was like to grow up as an African-American boy in rural West Virginia and the accompanying racial component of writing about his family as well as the black race, in general.  Of the comments made that I found to be especially relevant and helpful was his assertion that writing the memoir may serve as a form of therapy or simply lead to finding out that the writer may need to undergo therapy.  He adds that the act of writing is more important than the therapy.  His advice to anyone writing a memoir is to be prepared for the” revelation of things that you don’t even dream are going to come up.”  He added that “one should not sit around and wait until you have the story; just start telling the story.”  As for himself, Gates wrote that he had to take a trip to Milan, Italy through a secured grant that he attained as a professor at Harvard before he was able to fully throw himself into the work of writing his memoir.  He maintained that he had to be far away from home and provided with a captivating view.

But Gates also explains that the danger involved with that notion is self-indulgence.  He explains that writing a memoir involves indulging yourself in your own sentimentality and that ways should be found to guard against that.  He recommends using irony, wit, and humor in addition to being honest about pain and fear.  This seemed to be the constant theme of all the contributors to this book and one that I found every single author emphasizing.  Even the thoughts of fictional writer Toni Morrison seemed to relay this opinion and belief to the reader.  In her portion of the book’s text entitled The Site of Memory, Morrison explains what she refers to as the “symbiotic embrace” of self-recollection and fiction in her accounts of historical perspective offered up in slave narratives.  The slave’s stories of brutality, adversity and sometimes deliverance from those elements were often written by the author in order to grasp and take advantage of the power of literacy.  As Morrison writes, “literacy was a way of assuming and proving the ‘humanity’ of the slaves that the Constitution denied them.”  She explained this as the reason for many of the slave narratives carrying the subtitle “written by himself ,” or “herself,” while also including introductions by white sympathizers to account for their authenticity.  When referring to those events that some may have wished to “have a veil placed over”, Morrison writes that she is willing to take the responsibility of presenting such issues with the “veil drawn aside”.

Morrison implies that in order for this to happen, the writer must trust his or her own recollections while at the same time, depending on the recollections of others.  She explains that memory is “weighed heavily in what I write, in how I begin and in what I find to be significant.”  With this in mind, I feel that Morrison’s text partly summarizes what I have gleaned from reading this book while at the same time emphasizing what is exposed in the title-Inventing the Truth.  Where no evidence of thought and emotion is the case in the narratives and memoirs that Morrison studies and rewrites accordingly in her non-fiction work, the same must be addressed when one is undertaking the task of writing their own memoir.  The truth is to be invented.  Not simply made-up, but instead forged from a collection of memories, stories and family history that may be utilized in order to more accurately reflect the thoughts and emotions that are initially to much to bear or expose.
 
I feel that this book has given me insight into just how I should take up writing a memoir.  I have learned that a mosaic method must be employed consisting of the two elements of art and craft.  If a memoir is to truly offer up a sense of who I am and what I am about as a result of the values and heritage that shaped me then I must be willing to seriously write with the impact of truth and proper text construction.  Unhappy memories must be “uncloaked” and laid out for the reader to see and not necessarily for the simple idea of telling the truth.  We must “reinvent the truth” being careful to not leave out the unusually vivid details that give a glimpse into just why we behave, think or believe the way we do. 

Crystal Norton

This book is divided into four parts.  The first section is a precursor to the main event:  I-Searching.  In this part, Ken Macrorie discusses the benefits of free-writing, learning from each other (as writers), and using simple and concise English.  Basically, Macrorie is arguing for writing that is important to the author and is quick and easy for the reader to comprehend. 

In the second section of the book, Macrorie gets to main event: the I-Search paper.  In this part, he explains that I-Searching is finding some bit of research you want to do, for whatever reason, and doing it.  Writers are to put themselves in the paper and take the reader along for the ride.  The I-Search paper can be outlined (but does not have to be) as follows:

1.      What I did/did not know

2.      Why this topic

3.      The telling of the search

4.      What I know now/conclusion/etc

Far from being a standard research paper, this style of paper demands writers to be both objective and subjective, to use the dreaded “I,” and to get out of the library and off the internet and talk to experts.  Writers are asked to tell a story and let interviewees tell them a story.

The third section of the book is dedicated to editing.  This section is a “little” (in-joke) small, which seems to emphasize the need for content.  The section covers words to avoid (such as “little,” now you get it), punctuation, and “Editing Day.”  The last part is about getting a response from fellow writers (workshopping).

The final section of the book covers histories and other odds and ends about libraries, periodicals, dictionaries, etc.  In his attempt to understand what makes some people love books (and writing), Macrorie gives information and sometimes strange stories to go along with that information. 

Summing up the I-Search paper, Macrorie reminds the reader that this paper is meant to teach the writer as well as the reader. 

I am in love.  That is not a random statement.  I am in love with the idea of the I-Search paper.  Before reading this book, I’d never thought much about the actual word research.  But, as Macrorie points out, it is repeating the searches done before – nothing innovative or personal about it.  Frankly, it is boring.  Still, I like writing, so I have never been too bothered about writing such a paper, though I did break convention every chance I had.  Most of my students will not like writing or dare to break convention (purposefully – and I’m not trying to be egotistical here, I was told I was strange).  So, will the subjective nature of this paper (replacing the objective research) outweigh the new work involved (I mean the interviewing?).  Will the students be excited about the chance to break with the norm?  Here is where I do my own I-Searching.  I will just have to take my new questions to an expert: Dr. Lenoir. 

Summary:
The primary goal of the Bomer’s teaching is to get students to think about what they can do to make a better world.  They take teachers through a number of steps to teach us how we can get students to begin thinking in a different way.  The Bomers quote a number of authors who express the same belief as they do.  John Dewey said in a pamphlet in 1897 that “creating a better, more democratic world was what school was for.  No other social institution stands as much of a chance of creating a better world.”  The Bomers also express the opinion that “democratic learning inside a classroom also must be connected and attentive to social life outside the classroom” (12).

The textbook begins by giving us concepts for critical reading.  It explains that every classroom creates a discourse.  Discourse creates thinking.  It tells the students how you want them to think about what they read.  The concepts that they list that we should keep in mind and discuss with our classrooms are as follows:  groups, power, taking things for granted, fairness/justice, voice/silence, multiple perspectives (different side of the story, representation (showing what people are like), gender, race, class, money, labor, language, intimate relationships and families, relationships to nature, violence and peace, acting alone or together.  Teachers may concentrate on one particular concept based on conversations and what is discussed in class.  We might introduce a concept in connection with a text that the class will be reading.

We have to teach students to participate in a conversation.  They need to use connective language like I agree with, could you say more about, I am not sure I understood you when.  Bomer suggest writing these phrases on chart paper and hanging it on the wall to refresh student’s memory.   Other ways to have critical conversations are conversation partners, fishbowl conversations, thinking devices (reading notebooks), transcribing children’s conversations, listening to their discussions on audiotape and watching themselves on videotape.  As teachers we need to learn help more children talk.  We should never push quiet students, but help them become comfortable and present a comfortable environment.  The authors suggest using the Native American talking stick in classes that are very active in the discussion.  The student holding the stick has the floor and no one should interrupt them.  The authors used this in their classroom when the goal was for students to recognize one another in their conversations.  Role-playing is   an effective way for students to understand issues.  Critical conversations can be enriched by role-playing.

The reading workshop is another important element in the Bomer’s classroom.  Early in the school year we must find out what kind of readers our students are.  They do not mean good/bad, but what types of genres they enjoy, favorite reading environment, noise and presence of food or drink.  It is important to get a sense of what students like.

A writer’s notebook seems to be very important to the authors.  They suggest learning what authors of particular genres keep in their writing notebooks such as quotes and ideas.  The writing notebooks can be a way in which attention is drawn to the outside world.  We teachers can ask for reaction when someone is treated unfairly.

Another place that we may find social action in our students’ writing is a memoir.  This is their lives and they can present topics that are important to them.  They will express their concerns and opinions in these pieces.

This book was very hard to start reading.  It is not very interesting in the beginning.  There are a number of things that I believe that I take for granted when it comes to democracy.  I have always been interested in current events.  I enjoy government and history and I try to stay involved in politics.  Don’t quiz me on current events right now because I have been reading so much for school that I have failed to read any text other than school work.  I would be afraid to push the political envelope too much.  I think that sticking with the historical ways in which citizens have changed democracy in the United States would be effective in teaching.  We could look for ways in our present time that we might find the same problems.

The Bomers seem to be followers of Atwell.  They suggest minilessons throughout the textbook.  I don’t mention them in the summary because most instances they didn’t particular suggest what the minilesson would be about.

Susan Swanson

Vassallo, Phillip. “Reflections of the Inner Voice.”  ETC 61 (2004): 180-86.

Phillip Vassallo is the author of Inwardness of the Outside Gaze; Learning and Teaching Through Philosophy and The Art of On-the-Job Writing. He has also published over 100 articles in various journals and publications.  Vassallo holds a B.A. in English from Baruch College, an M.S. in education from Lehman College, and a doctorate in educational theory from Rutgers University. He has taught writing for Cornell University, Kean University, and Middlesex County College.

In “Reflections of the Inner Voice” Vassallo discusses why he decided to become a writer and teach writing, and what he believes a teacher must do in order to help students find their own voice in their writing.  Vassallo begins his article with examples of voices that many characters in literature and history heard (for example, Heathcliff remains haunted by the voice of Catherine even after her death in Wuthering Heights), and how those voices inspire the reader.  He then compares those voices to the ones we all hear daily of those people around us, and how they influence (inspire) our lives and work.  Vassallo says that he decided to write and to teach writing for two main reasons: he heard his parents talk about their struggles as Maltese immigrants and learned that “an education is an experience as close to freedom as [he] will ever know” (181), and various teachers aided him in finding a love of words.

Susan Swanson

Donald M. Murray’s Crafting a Life in Essay, Story, Poem is a book about how to write.  While that may sound intrinsically simple, Murray explores writing’s complexities by delving into each step of writing with ideas and examples on how to begin, how to write essays, fiction, and poetry, and what to do once you are finished writing.  The chapter that begins the book outlines what to do before one even begins writing.  By giving examples of writers who never start, writers who do not finish, writers who do not publish, and a host of excuses as to why these things do or do not occur, Murray shows possibilities of what each writer feels and how that writer acts and reacts to his/her writing (or lack thereof).  Murray expounds the need to cultivate a writing habit and explains his own needs and characteristics of writing, while also sharing quotes and habits of other writers.  He makes the reader feel at ease with their discomfort over their particular writing quirks, and then shows them how they might eradicate, transform, or use those to create a piece of writing. 

Murray gave an example of a line he has framed over his desk, “nulla dies sine linea” or, “never a day without a line” (17).  This line is a daily reminder of his need to write, and of the need that writers have of strengthening their writing muscle by exercising it daily.  Murray covers the writer’s dreaded blank canvas with enthusiasm; he says one must tune into that blankness, explore it, and the blankness will mold scenes, people, phrases.  He then goes on to break down the elements of an essay, work of fiction, or poem; or at least, the elements that make them work well.  Finally, he clarifies the difference between editing and revising and breaks each down so the budding writer can decide when, where, and how to use each one.  Murray ends with tips on sending work to a publisher and covers frequently asked questions about publishing.