Response to Schultz

I find it amazing, having read this article, that anyone ever left common or secondary school with any ambition for writing at all. If you were to sit down with a group of English teachers and try to create a book that would stifle students and turn them off to writing entirely, you would only need to provide a revised edition of Walker’s book. And yet, there were people who went on to become writers. There people who went on to become very gifted writers. It is easy for me to sit here today and criticize what I see as being an obviously-flawed method, but it had to work to some extent. We did not become a society of illiterates because children hated to write. We did not lose all literary ability, even though we stressed memorization and repetition over creativity and innovation. Something had to have worked effectively in this system.

I cannot bring myself to say that Walker had the right idea. My own thoughts on student creativity and exploration forbid me from uttering such a hypocritical idea. I do think that students can, and should, learn to write by writing. We don’t teach a student the theory of driving and then expect him to be prepared to drive. The best way for students to learn is to “get their hands dirty.” I present my students with opportunities to write long before I tell them how they should be writing. One of the first activities my students do is to write an essay introducing themselves to me. I don’t tell them what I mean by essay, and I don’t give them a set of rules that they must follow. I want them to write first and see that they do indeed have the ability to do it. Too often, I see students who are so concerned with doing something right, that they never even take a chance. If they can see that they already have the ability, they are much more likely to practice the skills that accompany it. Students need to have a sense of ownership over their work. They have few things in the world that truly belong to them. They may have a lot of “stuff” but most of that can be taken away by some authority figure. A student’s words and thoughts are his own, and they should remain that way. My job should not be to force my thoughts into a student, but rather, to provide a means for her to express her thoughts more clearly and in a form that is acceptable for a larger audience.

How can I justify using a method so opposed to Walker’s if I am willing to admit that it must have worked for students in his generation? I will blame it on the students. Walker was teaching a generation that had a much different work ethic than the one that I teach. His students would dutifully copy the work of other writers and eventually be able to connect it their own. My students would laugh in my face and sit, arms folded, and stare at a blank page. Students have become more than just little yes-men. They think and argue and question and refuse to be seen as anything other than a thinking individual. Walker’s text worked because students were willing to do what was requested. That is not the case today. Thank you Mr. Frost!