Burley 1
Jack Burley
Writ 101
Ashley Rives
21 October 2015
Writing Reform
The writing system as we know it is structured differently worldwide. Writing curriculum
in America is standardized in theory, but in practice it is spread apart. The difference shows in
the vast amount of public and private schools nationwide that practice quite different methods of
teaching writing. As a product of both public and private school writing education I am best fit to
answer the question: How could writing education in high schools be reformed? The biggest
issue I found with answering this question was all the factors that play into having any type of
reform, and budget is number one always. However, I believe I can offer an alternative solution
that would incorporate the current budget. Reforming writing in high schools nationwide can be
done by a simple attitude change concerning the process of writing. As the fundamentals of
writing have been taught in the first years of schooling, I have concluded that is not the main
concern for change. It is time to teach students more emphasis on analytical writing skills and it
starts with the teachers.
Throughout my reading I found numerous arguments stating education reform as a whole
needs more money in order to bring testing up. I finally found a specific article pertaining to
writing education in America and the result is astonishing. The main issue concerning writing
education in mostly public schools is the belief that the needs of social, cognitive, emotional,
physical, and linguistical growth have to be addressed in every classroom. This is a hard sell
when it comes to mastering any subject especially because it spreads students and teachers thin.
Commented [AR1]: Hi, Jack—
Fundamentally, I’m pretty much in agreeance with you in terms
of what you are saying. I do think we—myself included in my
days teaching high school—place too much emphasis on form at
younger ages of writing and I honestly only see this getting
worse and not better (you can read the latest standards, the
Common Core State Standards, if you want to know what I
mean). I also think this is something that needs to be addressed,
but if we focus on analysis and content, that is not something
that can be standardized, tested, and measured easily.
Computers are not to the point, yet, of being able to judge
analysis and ideas. They can only look for form, grammar,
punctuation, and key words. I bring up computers, because that
is how most standardized writing is scored—it isn’t read by live
people. It is read by algorithms. But, these are just my thoughts
on some of what you are writing about.
In terms of your paper as a whole, this draft is doing a good job
of exploring ideas and I do think you are making claims, but you
are not really supporting them, yet. Part of that has to do with
not making it clear who you are writing to and what you are
asking them to do. Focusing on this idea of what you want them
to do will help with the revision. Once you determine that, what
are the reasons the audience should do this? Use those reasons
to develop paragraphs. Within those paragraphs, how can you
convince the audience to do this?
Draft Rating: 2&2
Process Credit: 7.5/7.5
Commented [AR2]: Well, this is a bold claim.
Commented [AR3]: I’m not sure I follow you here.
Commented [AR4]: I’m curious to see where this goes. I
appreciate that this starts with talking about the issue, but I’m
concerned that in looking at education reform that you might
lose focus on writing.
I see the glimmer of a claim here, but this really still just tells me
what you are writing about. It doesn’t really give me an idea of
what you are going to argue and why you are going to argue it—
what you want your audience to do and why. I really do want to
see you mimic the CARS model in your introduction, so you may
want to move some things around here. Think about the moves
you need to make:
1. Establish the Territory (what does the field of writing already
know or accept about writing instruction?)
2. Establish the Niche (based on what you read and researched,
what do you feel is not being said, is not being covered in as
much detail as necessary ,is wrong, or just needs to be examined ...
Commented [AR5]: Pretty long paragraph. Paragraphs that
are longer than a page are intimidating to readers, and they
often suggest a lack of focus.
Commented [AR6]: Considering the purpose of this
assignment, this concerns me as a start to a sentence. It’s not
bad, but what I’m afraid is that it will lead to a summary of what
you read.
As you establish your claim more, try re-developing your
paragraph structure. Once you figure out what you are going to
ask your audience to do, make a list of reasons for why they ...
Commented [AR7]: Is testing all we should be worried about,
though?
Commented [AR8]: I’m not sure what the concern is here.
Can you help me understand this sentence a little better?
 Burley 2
Dr. Sam says “We won’t get more great schools until we get more clarity around the ultimate
purpose of schooling”(25). This quote ties into writing very well. I feel that most of writing
education is too broad and everyone has a different idea of how to properly “teach” it. I
mentioned focusing on analytical writing earlier, and if teachers were to understand that getting
students to think in this way is setting them up for success. Most of college prep high schools
don’t even teach analytical writing skills and that is the number one thing that is required in
college! So, in order for writing to move forward the attitude of teaching students how to think
about writing needs to change. Currently students nationwide are taught to gather information,
whether from teachers or other sources, and basically regurgitate these facts without analyzing
what it means to them. Of course this type of writing excludes writing such as scientific papers
but that is writing that can be taught in a cut in dry method because it is straightforward. Follow
rules and turn in your work. Having students learn proper analytical writing skills will breed a
new generation of thinkers and thus promote schooling. Dr. Sam says, “Writing helps students
become better readers and thinkers. It can help students reflect critically about the information
and ideas they must understand and make use of both in academia and in the world outside its
doors”(35). It starts and ends with writing, and if parents and the country alike want to see better
results in education it will start with writing. Sam uses the key word “comprehension” in his
statement and it plays a big role in what I said earlier. Breaking away from this robotic sense of
regurgitation and getting more into fully understanding what were learning. This key concept of
comprehension is a number one target (or should be) for teachers. Wouldn’t a teacher love to
know that students understand what they are teaching? I think so, and it is completely possible
with a simple attitude change pertaining to writing.
Commented [AR9]: ,
Commented [AR10]: As a reader, I’m not sure of the context
of this quote (although kudos for introducing it!). What is talking
about when he says it?
Commented [AR11]: I don’t see the connection here. How
did we go from talking about the concerns to this quote to the
idea that writing is too broad.
I have no doubt that you see a connection, Jack, but this is a case
of needing to write for your audience. You have to walk us
through the connection because we may not have read your
article.
Commented [AR12]: Okay, but current standards do stress
this. Almost exclusively.
Commented [AR13]: Support for this claim?
What do you mean by “analytical” here?
Commented [AR14]: Good. This makes to me and I can
understand what you are saying here. Could you start your
paragraph with this idea? This seems like a claim worth
exploring and proving. However, how does it tie to the overall
claim of the paper? How does it ask your audience to do
something?
Commented [AR15]: But scientific papers are analytical.
Scientists are real people who look at results, interpret them,
and give them meaning. That is why in a lab report you have the
“discussion” section. That is the part where you give the results
meaning. This is analysis. You analyze the results of the
experiment.
Commented [AR16]: This seems like another claim.
Commented [AR17]: We refer to authors by last name.
Commented [AR18]: How is he using this?
Commented [AR19]: As I read this paragraph, Jack, I can see
you trying to develop claims. You are not just reporting the
information you read, which his good. You are interacting with
the research and talking back to it.
However, this paragraph doesn’t have a clear focus, yet. What
argument are you making in this paragraph? Why would you
want to make this argument? What is your support? Why does
this argument matter? How does it relate to your overall claim?
Ultimately, what are you asking your audience to do and why
should they do this?
I actually think quite a bit of this is here, but not in a way that is
logical for readers. If you were standing in front of your
audience, how would you convince them?
 Burley 3
My personal experiences regarding writing in high school reflects much of what I have
been saying. I was fortunately able to learn some analytical writing skills but nothing compared
to what I should have learned. I came to college and had my first real taste of analyzing in depth
what I have read. What helped me finally conquer getting deeper into my readings was a lay out
in which I was taught the necessary steps to take in order to reach a legitimate conclusion. It
starts with learning how to ask yourself the right questions. This simple step could have been
taught to me earlier but it wasn’t. Why? I believe at lower levels of writing teachers are more
concerned with teaching writing structure and forget what is most important, content. I was
taught how to structure my writing all the way down to how many sentences should used in a
conclusion. I do not think putting these types of restrictions on students is healthy because when
a student is losing points on something like not having following strict structure protocol, they
lose the point of writing completely. We write to make statements and prove points. Of course, I
am not disregarding all structure in writing, as it is a necessary part of learning how to write in a
professional setting. But 4 years of focus on how to write perfect MLA is supremely
unproductive.
In my source reading I found a proper amount of analytical research pertaining to my
claim, and furthermore lots of bright minds coming together and agreeing with me. As stated
previously, I had a formal writing education and it seems now that I reflect on that experience I
can see how much it fell into the “needs reform” section. First, the fact that I spent so much time
learning writing structure completely goes against my source Dr. Sam who clearly states in
multiple articles that reading and writing comprehension is number one. Again I see a lack in
teachers understanding of this, and I cant seem to understand it. It couldn’t be from the lack of
teachers experience in the field of analytical writing, could it? No, it is because of high education
Commented [AR20]: Trying to separate your experiences
from the research is a normal move in a first draft of a paper like
this. It can be hard to see how you can cite your experiences just
like you cite a quote from the research, but that is what you need
to do.
As I read this, it signals that you are now going to tell me a
narrative of your experiences, but as a reader I’m not sure why.
Start with a claim.
Commented [AR21]: Try taking this idea and make it claim:
Asking students to follow strict writing rules overshadows the
point of writing because…”. Could you support a claim like this?
How? With what research (both the readings and your
experiences)? What would you be asking your audience to do?
I’m having a hard time determining your audience. In my head, it
seems like it should be teachers, but you also seem to be talking
about them rather than to them, which suggests an audience that
is not teachers.
Commented [AR22]: Do you see how this signals a
summary?
Commented [AR23]:
Commented [AR24]: What does he mean here, though?
Commented [AR25]:
 Burley 4

officials creating a curriculum that does not have writing at its centerpiece. Teachers are left with Commented [AR26]: Okay, so is this your audience?

no choice other than follow orders or lose job. As a teacher, job trumps all. So we have a paradox

of ultimate proportions. One where we have a simple fix to our writing program, but is weighed

down by a curriculum made by people who have not been in a classroom in decades. This added Commented [AR27]: Or ever, honestly.

to the fact that teachers are inhibited from doing anything other than follow this said curriculum.

I have no doubt that this is what I saw in my years of learning, and it is one of the biggest factors

holding schools back. Secondly, when I finally learned how to write analytically, I found my

level of comprehension soar, and with that my success as a student. Tests became easier; writing

became less of a burden and more a point of confidence. This is what students need, especially at

a younger age. Teachers need to give students the tools to success in the field of writing and it

begins each and every individual teacher making that commitment.
In a final point I think it is important to understand that there are many teachers and
institutions that value writing. These are not particularly the places that need reforming, but it is
imperative that large institutions and teachers alike set an example to lesser performing people
Commented [AR28]: As a teacher, there is a part of me that is
glad to see that you shifted your blame elsewhere—although I
do think we hold some responsibility. What I’m struggling with
here is how this ties into your overall argument. I’m still not sure
who your audience is and what you are asking them to do. It
seems to shift between teachers and policy makers, but
remember that to be convincing, you can only ask the audience
to do something within their power. That is where I’m getting
confused. I do think you have some ideas about what needs to be
changed, but I’m not sure if you are asking the right people to
change it.

and places. This would add to the ease of which a reform could take place. Our society sees a

school underperforming, and attributes that to low budget. While that may be the case is certain Commented [AR29]: Sometimes it is.

incidences, it is not the overwhelming cause of bad testing. Furthermore, the problem doesn’t Commented [AR30]: I’m not sure what you are saying here.

stop at bad testing, it doesn’t stop with school reputation, or teacher jobs; it is a problem that

stems much deeper. The kids of this nation need to learn how to write analytically and gain the

confidence they need to succeed.

In conclusion, I have found that answering my claim was easier than I originally thought.

I was able to find an answer through analysis of all my source reading. I asked myself three main Commented [AR31]: I think this is true and indicative of
what happened in this paper, Jack—you let your research
answer the question, which means you are not adding anything
questions: What is the problem? Who is the problem? And why is this a problem? Through new to the conversation.
 Burley 5

answering these three critical questions I was able to conclude that writing analytically and

reading comprehension were the two main factors in student success. My personal experiences

are evidence enough of that. Therefore, reforming high school writing can be done by teaching

students how to write analytically. Commented [AR32]: How does one do this? How does it look
different than what we are currently teaching? I think you have
to address this to be convincing in this argument.
Works Cited

Dysthe, Olga. "How a Reform Affects Writing in Higher Education." Studies in Higher

Education 32.2 (2007): 237-52. Web.

Sullivan, Francis J. "Student Needs and Strong Composition: The Dialectics of Writing Program

Reform." College Composition and Communication 48.3 (1997): 372-91. JSTOR. Web.

19 Oct. 2015.