In DC, even the Spelling Bee draws protesters
By LAUREN SAUSSER, Associated Press Writer Lauren Sausser, Associated Press Writer – Thu Jun 3, 3:55 pm ET
WASHINGTON – The nation's capital always draws its share of protesters, picketing for causes ranging from health care reform to immigration policy.
But spelling bee protesters? They're out here, too.
Four peaceful protesters, some dressed in full-length black and yellow bee costumes, represented the American Literacy Council and the London-based Spelling Society and stood outside the Grand Hyatt on Thursday, where the Scripps National Spelling Bee is being held. Their message was short: Simplify the way we spell words.
Roberta Mahoney, 81, a former Fairfax County, Va. elementary school principal, said the current language obstructs 40 percent of the population from learning how to read, write and spell.
"Our alphabet has 425-plus ways of putting words together in illogical ways," Mahoney said.
The protesting cohort distributed pins to willing passers-by with their logo, "Enuf is enuf. Enough is too much."
According to literature distributed by the group, it makes more sense for "fruit" to be spelled as "froot," "slow" should be "slo," and "heifer" — a word spelled correctly during the first oral round of the bee Thursday by Texas competitor Ramesh Ghanta — should be "hefer."
Meanwhile, inside the hotel's Independence Ballroom, 273 spellers celebrated the complexity of the language in all its glory, correctly spelling words like zaibatsu, vibrissae and biauriculate.
While the protesters could make headway with cell phone texters who routinely swap "u" for "you" and "gr8" for "great," their message may be a harder sell for the Scripps crowd.
Mahoney had trouble gaining traction with at least one bee attendee. New Mexico resident Matthew Evans, 15, a former speller whose sister is participating in the bee this year, reasoned with her that if English spellings were changed, spelling bees would cease to exist.
"If a dictionary lists 'enough' as 'enuf,' the spelling bee goes by the dictionary, therefore all the spelling words are easier to spell, so the spelling bee is gone," Evans said.
"Well," Mahoney replied, "they could pick their own dictionary."
Friday, June 4, 2010
Summary of Linda Flower & John R. Hayes by Leigh MacKay
A Summary of Linda Flower and John R. Hayes’
"A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing"
An academic summary by Leigh MacKay
In their article, "A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing" (1981), researchers Linda Flower and John R. Hayes report the findings of their study using a new model to observe the processes writers employ in the act of composition. They conclude that writers use a combination of cognitive processes, which come to the foreground when and as needed. Further, they suggest that there is a hierarchical structure to these processes and that varied, changing levels of goals are key aspects of the writing process. Flower and Hayes believe their cognitive process theory of writing demonstrates that the act of creation is fed and sustained by the ever-changing imagination, art, and goals of the writer.
Rejecting traditional research methods, Flower and Hayes used protocol analysis (p. 368). To create a protocol, writers were assigned the task of writing an interesting, short composition for a magazine. An important stipulation was the requirement to think aloud as they worked. A tape recorder captured their spoken thoughts. The recording and the writer’s written material, rough notes and the article, were combined to create a single protocol. The researchers report that the protocols provided a bounty of valuable data on the factors that affect a writer’s processes.
Flower and Hayes organize their findings into four key points. The first key point is that there is a set of unique thinking processes that the writer selects and sorts during composition. In their study, they observed that writers began with the rhetorical problem of writing. Writers react to the problem by writing. The rhetorical problem, the audience, and the writer’s goals provide motivation. Flower and Hayes point out that an individual’s success in this process depends upon a writer’s ability to define the problem. The text exerts an influence upon the writer as the work develops. The growing text continually narrows the writer’s options for the text that is to follow. In addition, they identify the writer’s long-term memory, which they define as his/her life experience combined with the writier’s external sources, as being involved in the creative process. Finally, the writer plans how to accomplish the assignment by creating an internal representation. That representation, the researchers suggest, is the spark that feeds the creation and organization of ideas.
Flower and Hayes define the process of converting ideas into words on paper as translating. This process places demands on the writer to take abstract thoughts and put them through the technical aspects of writing such as grammar. Review is a factor in the process. The writer evaluates what they have written and then changes the text to suit their developing concept of the document. Flower and Hayes observed that writers monitor their process of development and its progress as they write. Monitoring is affected by changing goals and the writer’s method of writing.
Their second key point is that the cognitive processes in writing are hierarchical. Processes can contain other, more specific sub-processes. A hierarchical structure has strength in its flexibility. They suggest, by way of example, that composition can contain idea generation. They admit, however, that this doesn’t answer researcher Lee Odell’s question, “What guides the writer's decisions and choices and gives an overall purposeful structure to composing?"
This brings Flower and Hayes to the third and central point of their cognitive theory. Writing is goal-directed. Goals have a hierarchical structure like the greater hierarchy of all the processes involved in writing. It is here that they begin to answer Odell’s important question. Writers create goals as they write. Goals evolve during the writing process and they guide the writer in choosing which process to use at any given moment. All the other processes are managed by the writer’s high, middle, and low-level goals. The researchers believe that good writers generate easily achievable mid-level goals of good quality and quantity. Poor writers, they suggest, are caught in top and low-level goals that have greater difficulty in advancing the process of writing. Flower and Hayes emphasize that, “In the act of writing, people regenerate or recreate their own goals in the light of what they learn" (381).
The fourth and final point in the study concludes that writers find purpose in goals and those goals evolve as the writer learns about their subject through the process of writing. The researchers classify patterns of goals as: explore and consolidate, state and develop, and write and regenerate. From these revolving patterns of increasingly complex goals comes learning and creativity. Flower and Hayes conclude that the source of creativity comes from the writer’s ability to create goals and generate ideas.
© 2003
Back to top
Leigh MacKay is a graduate of the Print Futures: Professional Writing Program at Douglas College. Before taking the course, he spent thirty years of his life locked in small rooms playing music and chatting on the radio.
"A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing"
An academic summary by Leigh MacKay
In their article, "A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing" (1981), researchers Linda Flower and John R. Hayes report the findings of their study using a new model to observe the processes writers employ in the act of composition. They conclude that writers use a combination of cognitive processes, which come to the foreground when and as needed. Further, they suggest that there is a hierarchical structure to these processes and that varied, changing levels of goals are key aspects of the writing process. Flower and Hayes believe their cognitive process theory of writing demonstrates that the act of creation is fed and sustained by the ever-changing imagination, art, and goals of the writer.
Rejecting traditional research methods, Flower and Hayes used protocol analysis (p. 368). To create a protocol, writers were assigned the task of writing an interesting, short composition for a magazine. An important stipulation was the requirement to think aloud as they worked. A tape recorder captured their spoken thoughts. The recording and the writer’s written material, rough notes and the article, were combined to create a single protocol. The researchers report that the protocols provided a bounty of valuable data on the factors that affect a writer’s processes.
Flower and Hayes organize their findings into four key points. The first key point is that there is a set of unique thinking processes that the writer selects and sorts during composition. In their study, they observed that writers began with the rhetorical problem of writing. Writers react to the problem by writing. The rhetorical problem, the audience, and the writer’s goals provide motivation. Flower and Hayes point out that an individual’s success in this process depends upon a writer’s ability to define the problem. The text exerts an influence upon the writer as the work develops. The growing text continually narrows the writer’s options for the text that is to follow. In addition, they identify the writer’s long-term memory, which they define as his/her life experience combined with the writier’s external sources, as being involved in the creative process. Finally, the writer plans how to accomplish the assignment by creating an internal representation. That representation, the researchers suggest, is the spark that feeds the creation and organization of ideas.
Flower and Hayes define the process of converting ideas into words on paper as translating. This process places demands on the writer to take abstract thoughts and put them through the technical aspects of writing such as grammar. Review is a factor in the process. The writer evaluates what they have written and then changes the text to suit their developing concept of the document. Flower and Hayes observed that writers monitor their process of development and its progress as they write. Monitoring is affected by changing goals and the writer’s method of writing.
Their second key point is that the cognitive processes in writing are hierarchical. Processes can contain other, more specific sub-processes. A hierarchical structure has strength in its flexibility. They suggest, by way of example, that composition can contain idea generation. They admit, however, that this doesn’t answer researcher Lee Odell’s question, “What guides the writer's decisions and choices and gives an overall purposeful structure to composing?"
This brings Flower and Hayes to the third and central point of their cognitive theory. Writing is goal-directed. Goals have a hierarchical structure like the greater hierarchy of all the processes involved in writing. It is here that they begin to answer Odell’s important question. Writers create goals as they write. Goals evolve during the writing process and they guide the writer in choosing which process to use at any given moment. All the other processes are managed by the writer’s high, middle, and low-level goals. The researchers believe that good writers generate easily achievable mid-level goals of good quality and quantity. Poor writers, they suggest, are caught in top and low-level goals that have greater difficulty in advancing the process of writing. Flower and Hayes emphasize that, “In the act of writing, people regenerate or recreate their own goals in the light of what they learn" (381).
The fourth and final point in the study concludes that writers find purpose in goals and those goals evolve as the writer learns about their subject through the process of writing. The researchers classify patterns of goals as: explore and consolidate, state and develop, and write and regenerate. From these revolving patterns of increasingly complex goals comes learning and creativity. Flower and Hayes conclude that the source of creativity comes from the writer’s ability to create goals and generate ideas.
© 2003
Back to top
Leigh MacKay is a graduate of the Print Futures: Professional Writing Program at Douglas College. Before taking the course, he spent thirty years of his life locked in small rooms playing music and chatting on the radio.
A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing
Flower, Linda, and John Hayes.
"A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing."
College Composition and Communication 32 (1981):365-87.
Flower and Hayes reject theories of stages of the writing process; to them seeing writing as individual stages, exercises kept succinctly separate from each other, autonomous activities that lead to perfect writing--prewriting, then writing, then rewriting, then I'm done--oversimplifies what writing really is and reduces the mental activities that comprise writing. Stage models are inadequate in representing the 'moment by moment' process of writing. They find four principles in the cognitive process model which describe the actual process of composing.
1. "Writing is best understood as a set of distinctive thinking processes which writers orchestrate or organize during the act of composing." That is, the mental processes are devised while the writing is actually being done.
2. "The processes of writing are hierarchically organized, with component processes embedded within other components." The mental activities occur in no particular order, with the mind being unpredictably associational rather than linear.
3. "Writing is a goal-directed process. In the act of composing, writers create a hierarchical network of goals and these in turn guide the writing process." Writers create goals, but do not always state those goals.
4. "Writers create their own goals in two key ways: by generating goals and support goals which embody a purpose; and, at times, by changing or regenerating their own top-level goals in light of what they have learned by writing." Writers go back and revise those goals as necessary.
Flower and Hayes' Cognitive Process Model [not pictured] has four items:
The Task Environment, which encompasses the writer, the problem, the text. Long-Term Memory, the storehouse of knowledge about the subject, the problem, and the writing process. Writing Processes, where the goal setting, planning, and reviewing take place. Monitor, the writing strategist which determines when the writer moves from one task to the next.
Flower, Linda and John R. Hayes. “A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing.” College Composition and Communications, 32 (1981): 365-87
"A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing."
College Composition and Communication 32 (1981):365-87.
Flower and Hayes reject theories of stages of the writing process; to them seeing writing as individual stages, exercises kept succinctly separate from each other, autonomous activities that lead to perfect writing--prewriting, then writing, then rewriting, then I'm done--oversimplifies what writing really is and reduces the mental activities that comprise writing. Stage models are inadequate in representing the 'moment by moment' process of writing. They find four principles in the cognitive process model which describe the actual process of composing.
1. "Writing is best understood as a set of distinctive thinking processes which writers orchestrate or organize during the act of composing." That is, the mental processes are devised while the writing is actually being done.
2. "The processes of writing are hierarchically organized, with component processes embedded within other components." The mental activities occur in no particular order, with the mind being unpredictably associational rather than linear.
3. "Writing is a goal-directed process. In the act of composing, writers create a hierarchical network of goals and these in turn guide the writing process." Writers create goals, but do not always state those goals.
4. "Writers create their own goals in two key ways: by generating goals and support goals which embody a purpose; and, at times, by changing or regenerating their own top-level goals in light of what they have learned by writing." Writers go back and revise those goals as necessary.
Flower and Hayes' Cognitive Process Model [not pictured] has four items:
The Task Environment, which encompasses the writer, the problem, the text. Long-Term Memory, the storehouse of knowledge about the subject, the problem, and the writing process. Writing Processes, where the goal setting, planning, and reviewing take place. Monitor, the writing strategist which determines when the writer moves from one task to the next.
Flower, Linda and John R. Hayes. “A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing.” College Composition and Communications, 32 (1981): 365-87
Cognitive Writing Theory/Model Flowers and Hayes
Flower and Hayes Model
• set of thinking processes which writers orchestrate
• processes have a hierarchical and embedded organization
• composing is a goal-directed thinking process
• goals are developed at the beginning, but can change
• Flower, Linda and Hayes, John. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois. 2003
• Summary of Composition Theories
• First-Order Thinking
• relinquishing control
• careless, fast
• intuitive, creative
• does not strive for direction
• heightens intelligence
• Second-Order Thinking
• imposing control
• careful
• conscious and directed
• scrutinize each part
• tough-mindedly critical
See this post for more on first and second order thinking:
http://projects.pomona.edu/writingcenter/index.php?n=Main.FirstAndSecondOrderThinking
Greek and Roman, Five Stages Process
• invention
• arrangement
• style
• memory
• delivery
• Renaissance Ramist Rhetoricians
• sought a purely objective discourse
• redefined invention/arrangement as logical matters
• led to the recent focus solely on the style component
• Rohman and Wlecke, Three Stages
• pre-writing
• writing
• editing
• Britton and Emig, Three Writing Types
• poetic—produces literary artifacts
• expressive/reflexive—exploration of one’s feelings about a subject
• transactional/extensive—convey information
• Writing Across the Curriculum
• began in Britain in the late 1960’s
• composing process is idiosyncratic
• two approaches: journal centered (personal-style) and academic discourse (prioritize academic writing and Standard English)
• Revision
• impossible in speech, except as an after-thought
• cues initiate changes which occur continually throughout the writing of a composition
Flower and Hayes Model
• set of thinking processes which writers orchestrate
• processes have a hierarchical and embedded organization
• composing is a goal-directed thinking process
• goals are developed at the beginning, but can change
• Recursion
• an entire process is embedded within a larger instance of itself
• like a fractal pattern
• not linear
Works Cited
• Bizzel, Patricia. The Teaching of Writing: Composing Process. University of Chicago Press. 1986.
• Elbow, Peter. Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Teaching and Learning. Oxford University Press. 1986.
• Flower, Linda and Hayes, John. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois. 2003.
• Nelson, Kimberly. The Great Conversation (of the Dining Hall): One Student’s Experience of College Level Writing. University of Iowa.
• Sommers, Nancy. Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois. 2003.
• set of thinking processes which writers orchestrate
• processes have a hierarchical and embedded organization
• composing is a goal-directed thinking process
• goals are developed at the beginning, but can change
• Flower, Linda and Hayes, John. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois. 2003
• Summary of Composition Theories
• First-Order Thinking
• relinquishing control
• careless, fast
• intuitive, creative
• does not strive for direction
• heightens intelligence
• Second-Order Thinking
• imposing control
• careful
• conscious and directed
• scrutinize each part
• tough-mindedly critical
See this post for more on first and second order thinking:
http://projects.pomona.edu/writingcenter/index.php?n=Main.FirstAndSecondOrderThinking
Greek and Roman, Five Stages Process
• invention
• arrangement
• style
• memory
• delivery
• Renaissance Ramist Rhetoricians
• sought a purely objective discourse
• redefined invention/arrangement as logical matters
• led to the recent focus solely on the style component
• Rohman and Wlecke, Three Stages
• pre-writing
• writing
• editing
• Britton and Emig, Three Writing Types
• poetic—produces literary artifacts
• expressive/reflexive—exploration of one’s feelings about a subject
• transactional/extensive—convey information
• Writing Across the Curriculum
• began in Britain in the late 1960’s
• composing process is idiosyncratic
• two approaches: journal centered (personal-style) and academic discourse (prioritize academic writing and Standard English)
• Revision
• impossible in speech, except as an after-thought
• cues initiate changes which occur continually throughout the writing of a composition
Flower and Hayes Model
• set of thinking processes which writers orchestrate
• processes have a hierarchical and embedded organization
• composing is a goal-directed thinking process
• goals are developed at the beginning, but can change
• Recursion
• an entire process is embedded within a larger instance of itself
• like a fractal pattern
• not linear
Works Cited
• Bizzel, Patricia. The Teaching of Writing: Composing Process. University of Chicago Press. 1986.
• Elbow, Peter. Embracing Contraries: Explorations in Teaching and Learning. Oxford University Press. 1986.
• Flower, Linda and Hayes, John. A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois. 2003.
• Nelson, Kimberly. The Great Conversation (of the Dining Hall): One Student’s Experience of College Level Writing. University of Iowa.
• Sommers, Nancy. Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers. Cross-Talk in Comp Theory. National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois. 2003.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Oratory 2010 Wanda Ramirez Upward Bound
[Good morning ladies and gentlemen in the audience, I will now deliver my speech titled: The Different Journey] By Wanda Ramirez (1st place Olimpiadas Academicas Upward Bound 2010)
“Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;”
The poem The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost highlights the decision process that many face in a daily basis; including teenagers like me. As many, I have taken many paths, in some I have stumbled and fallen several times. But today I stand and look beyond me taking advantage of every step by learning a little more every day.
The selection of available paths for the new generation seems unclear and uncertain from time to time.
But as teenagers we are also concern in topics such as
-Financial Security,
-Education & Health,
-Community & Family,
-Relationships & careers
But the reality is that:
The newspapers,
the Internet
and the broadcast news
constantly let us know of the teenagers’ poor judgment and few choices for the future.
Unfortunately, many criticize underestimate the lifestyles and behaviors of our age group.
However;
More individuals,
professionals
and good citizens
are indeed committed to help youngsters to acquire the tools and abilities that will sure lead them into the development of a better society.
Programs such as Upward Bound lend a hand to their participants in their preparation for college entrance by providing opportunities to succeed in their pre-college performance and ultimately in their higher education pursuits.
Their main goal is to increase the rate at which young high school students complete secondary education and graduate from institutions of postsecondary education.
TRIO Programs are a Federal outreach and student oriented services designed to identify and provide services for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds. These entities plan, develop and carry out the assistance that make a difference.
Probably, many of us would not even make it through high school with out the involvement of these great programs.
-As a fact; we need our education services to work with young people to address underlying educational difficulties and give them the opportunity to re-engage with learning.
-As a community; we should open the channels of communication to teenagers to address our country.
-Give the young people the chance to speak out on a range of profoundly important issues and that will provide to every citizen with an extraordinary opportunity to see the future through our eyes.
-Helping young people also means helping Puerto Rico. Teenagers will inherit and shape this beloved island, so ensuring that we have a promising and happy future should be a national concern.
-We want a future where everyone is free to express themselves, openly without fear of disapproval.
-We want to help foster a culture of understanding between generations in an age when it seems like the most vulnerable members of society are also the most rejected and misunderstood.
-Today, I set a new journey. I have accomplished my childhood years by moving forward towards a new life stage. My senior year it’s almost over, however, a new episode opens. My parents love me, my teachers acknowledge my skills and above all I feel proud of myself.
-It’s not the end it’s just the beginning.
It’s time for us to change the negative messages;
to one that will lead us to a different path.
The one that declares:
-To set your standard high; because you deserver the best.
-To try for what you want and never settle for less.
-To believe in yourself, no matter what you choose,
-Because by keeping a winning you will never loose.
-Think about your destination, but don’t worry if you stray
-Because the most important thing is what you have learned along the way.
-Take all that you’ve become
-To be, all that you can be
-Above all, let your dreams set you free.
The fostering of our lives should conclude gracefully
As Robert Frost once said:
“I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.”
Thank You!
“Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;”
The poem The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost highlights the decision process that many face in a daily basis; including teenagers like me. As many, I have taken many paths, in some I have stumbled and fallen several times. But today I stand and look beyond me taking advantage of every step by learning a little more every day.
The selection of available paths for the new generation seems unclear and uncertain from time to time.
But as teenagers we are also concern in topics such as
-Financial Security,
-Education & Health,
-Community & Family,
-Relationships & careers
But the reality is that:
The newspapers,
the Internet
and the broadcast news
constantly let us know of the teenagers’ poor judgment and few choices for the future.
Unfortunately, many criticize underestimate the lifestyles and behaviors of our age group.
However;
More individuals,
professionals
and good citizens
are indeed committed to help youngsters to acquire the tools and abilities that will sure lead them into the development of a better society.
Programs such as Upward Bound lend a hand to their participants in their preparation for college entrance by providing opportunities to succeed in their pre-college performance and ultimately in their higher education pursuits.
Their main goal is to increase the rate at which young high school students complete secondary education and graduate from institutions of postsecondary education.
TRIO Programs are a Federal outreach and student oriented services designed to identify and provide services for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds. These entities plan, develop and carry out the assistance that make a difference.
Probably, many of us would not even make it through high school with out the involvement of these great programs.
-As a fact; we need our education services to work with young people to address underlying educational difficulties and give them the opportunity to re-engage with learning.
-As a community; we should open the channels of communication to teenagers to address our country.
-Give the young people the chance to speak out on a range of profoundly important issues and that will provide to every citizen with an extraordinary opportunity to see the future through our eyes.
-Helping young people also means helping Puerto Rico. Teenagers will inherit and shape this beloved island, so ensuring that we have a promising and happy future should be a national concern.
-We want a future where everyone is free to express themselves, openly without fear of disapproval.
-We want to help foster a culture of understanding between generations in an age when it seems like the most vulnerable members of society are also the most rejected and misunderstood.
-Today, I set a new journey. I have accomplished my childhood years by moving forward towards a new life stage. My senior year it’s almost over, however, a new episode opens. My parents love me, my teachers acknowledge my skills and above all I feel proud of myself.
-It’s not the end it’s just the beginning.
It’s time for us to change the negative messages;
to one that will lead us to a different path.
The one that declares:
-To set your standard high; because you deserver the best.
-To try for what you want and never settle for less.
-To believe in yourself, no matter what you choose,
-Because by keeping a winning you will never loose.
-Think about your destination, but don’t worry if you stray
-Because the most important thing is what you have learned along the way.
-Take all that you’ve become
-To be, all that you can be
-Above all, let your dreams set you free.
The fostering of our lives should conclude gracefully
As Robert Frost once said:
“I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.”
Thank You!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
