Summary
Mike Rose analyzes the process of problem-solving in writing in students who he categorizes as “blockers” and “non-blockers”. Block writers are those who experience hardships in their process of writing. Their inverse are the non-blockers who carry more experience in their writing process which grants them to write with less difficulty. Therefore, Rose introduces concepts that writers use during their writing process which he identifies as rules and plans. Accordingly to Rose, writers use “rules and plans” in order to reach their goal in writing. He further explains the composition of rules and how these are used in problem solving operations. He explains that rules branch into algorithms and heuristics. Algorithms are rules that behave in a specific manner and are not likely to change; they are less “fitting” and more static. In the other hand, heuristics are flexible and are easily to craft with. Rose utilizes these concepts to explain the dynamic in writing of blockers and non-blockers. Blockers attach to algorithms which leads them to enclose their creativity and consequently undertakes them to follow their original plans. Their writing consists of rules that are inappropriate and thus restricts them from elaborating their ideas. The five blockers described in this excerpt have rules and plans that apply to their writing erroneously. For instance, Ruth believes that the first paragraph must engage the reader’s attention immediately. She is convinced that by following this rule her writing will be strong, and consequently leads her to force every writing to begin this way. Other rule embedded by blockers is the development of “three points” or statements in their writing. These are “rigid rules” that constrain the fluidity of the writer and is what Rose calls algorithm prose. In the other hand, non-blockers use less formulated rules and use more flexible ones. Unlike the blockers, they write freely without the mold of rules. Rose informs that those students who use less rigid rules write with less difficulty. More over, writing is meant to be “adventurous” and not restricted. Rose believes that these rigid rules and inflexible plans are the problem in the process of students’ writing. He assures that by replacing these constrains that limits and damages their writing by forcing in it into an outline replacing them with flexible rules and plans can turn the blockers into non-blockers.
Mike Rose analyzes the process of problem-solving in writing in students who he categorizes as “blockers” and “non-blockers”. Block writers are those who experience hardships in their process of writing. Their inverse are the non-blockers who carry more experience in their writing process which grants them to write with less difficulty. Therefore, Rose introduces concepts that writers use during their writing process which he identifies as rules and plans. Accordingly to Rose, writers use “rules and plans” in order to reach their goal in writing. He further explains the composition of rules and how these are used in problem solving operations. He explains that rules branch into algorithms and heuristics. Algorithms are rules that behave in a specific manner and are not likely to change; they are less “fitting” and more static. In the other hand, heuristics are flexible and are easily to craft with. Rose utilizes these concepts to explain the dynamic in writing of blockers and non-blockers. Blockers attach to algorithms which leads them to enclose their creativity and consequently undertakes them to follow their original plans. Their writing consists of rules that are inappropriate and thus restricts them from elaborating their ideas. The five blockers described in this excerpt have rules and plans that apply to their writing erroneously. For instance, Ruth believes that the first paragraph must engage the reader’s attention immediately. She is convinced that by following this rule her writing will be strong, and consequently leads her to force every writing to begin this way. Other rule embedded by blockers is the development of “three points” or statements in their writing. These are “rigid rules” that constrain the fluidity of the writer and is what Rose calls algorithm prose. In the other hand, non-blockers use less formulated rules and use more flexible ones. Unlike the blockers, they write freely without the mold of rules. Rose informs that those students who use less rigid rules write with less difficulty. More over, writing is meant to be “adventurous” and not restricted. Rose believes that these rigid rules and inflexible plans are the problem in the process of students’ writing. He assures that by replacing these constrains that limits and damages their writing by forcing in it into an outline replacing them with flexible rules and plans can turn the blockers into non-blockers.
Synthesis
In this article, Rose describes the process of writing in a way that he implements rules and plans demonstrating how the writer uses these to achieve the goal of his paper. He studies the writing processes of ten students of which five of them he identifies as blockers and the other five as non-blockers. He simply titles them in such way because the writers that struggled developing their writing ‘blocked’ and weren’t able to write fluidly. Rose lets us know that the non-blockers also face difficulties in writing. They are not magical creatures that write the perfect paper when attempting their first draft; they simply use the ‘right’ process or the right rules and plans. In the other hand, blocker’s writing processes are entirely wrong. Writers employ the rules that were taught to them by their writing teachers. Rose explains that the non-blockers became non-blockers when they were pinched by curiosity to try other writing methods. He explains this as problem-solving behavior, were the writer on its own pursues other possibilities when the ones he possesses are irrelevant. Having said this, I am uncertain if young students are taught in such way so they can formulate an idea of what writing is or if they are being underestimated of their writing capability. “Any such rule, though probably taught to aid the writer who needs structure, ultimately transforms a highly fluid process like writing into a mechanical lockstep.” (pg398). Rose depicts that a student that is taught such rules causes damage to the student’s writing. Over all, by replacing rigid rules for flexible ones the student is able to engage in the writing process effectively.
In this article, Rose describes the process of writing in a way that he implements rules and plans demonstrating how the writer uses these to achieve the goal of his paper. He studies the writing processes of ten students of which five of them he identifies as blockers and the other five as non-blockers. He simply titles them in such way because the writers that struggled developing their writing ‘blocked’ and weren’t able to write fluidly. Rose lets us know that the non-blockers also face difficulties in writing. They are not magical creatures that write the perfect paper when attempting their first draft; they simply use the ‘right’ process or the right rules and plans. In the other hand, blocker’s writing processes are entirely wrong. Writers employ the rules that were taught to them by their writing teachers. Rose explains that the non-blockers became non-blockers when they were pinched by curiosity to try other writing methods. He explains this as problem-solving behavior, were the writer on its own pursues other possibilities when the ones he possesses are irrelevant. Having said this, I am uncertain if young students are taught in such way so they can formulate an idea of what writing is or if they are being underestimated of their writing capability. “Any such rule, though probably taught to aid the writer who needs structure, ultimately transforms a highly fluid process like writing into a mechanical lockstep.” (pg398). Rose depicts that a student that is taught such rules causes damage to the student’s writing. Over all, by replacing rigid rules for flexible ones the student is able to engage in the writing process effectively.