# data[].attributes.body
List the sources you are working with as the title of your post. Copy and paste the following in a new post and fill in the blanks.

These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about _______________.
I think this because I identified ____, _____, _________ repeating/occuring as a pattern in these texts.
I think they are talking about this because____________________.
I find this interesting because ___________________________.

# data[].attributes.body
Read and respond to each of your peers via their padlet post. Your comment on their padlet post should accept the conversation your peer describes in their post and offer additional ways to think about it. You might find it useful to present your feedback in this format:

Yes, these scholars seem to be talking about _____________. They might also, however, be talking about ___________, ____________, ____________ and so it might be even more productive to explore the conversation in terms of ____________________.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about writing as participation. I think this because I identified Yancey describing digital writing tools allowing greater access to more people to write and share their ideas, Giovanelli describes revision as choices--as the ability to develop an idea over time and change your mind, essentially, and Carillo describes reading and writing as transactions between people who exchange ideas. They are talking about these things to highlight how digital writing in the 21st century could/should allow for greater social participation--more people writing, revising their ideas, and exchanging ideas with others--if we leverage these opportunities. I find this interesting because I'm intrigued and encouraged by the idea that writing education can provide more access to more people to participate in social conversations and social problem solving. I find this interesting as a conversation because Giovanelli and Carillo offer potential MODELS for implementing the new curriculum that Yancey is advocating for in her article.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to have a conversation about integration. I think this because I identified Pattanayak and Alvarez's states the need for more attention to marginalized voices and understanding of different cultures and linguistic differences. Carillo also emphasizes the importance of integrating more reading and variety in our education to better build a network of ideas. All of the authors argue and agree on the issue that more variety will aid developing students to become more active and engages citizens in the future. I think they talk about this because, historically reading and writing(mostly writing) has been viewed in a negative light, because of how it is painted in academic culture. Writing is often perceived as a skill that certain people have, I find this interesting because writing is an outlet to form arguments and pose propositions to change. It is not just limited to certain people with socioeconomic privileges but should be expanded to welcome the voices of all cultures, socioeconomic statuses, conflict, and more. I find this interesting because they all pose critiques on our current model of education, and point out a common issue in the way it is taught. They stress the need to adjust the historic model of academia into one that promotes critical thinking and inclusion.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about writing being a process of constant learning. I think this because Yancey explains that writing has changed throughout the centuries and educators should be kept up to date to be able to teach others new ways of writing, Giovanelli argues that all writing needs revision even if you think it doesn't, and Wardle explains that a student can't take only one class and expect to know everything about writing. I think they are talking about this because they want to emphasize the importance of continuously learning different methods of writing that can make a writer stronger. By comparing and contrasting what writing was like in the 20th century vs the 21st century, Yancey emphasizes the importance of educators keeping up to date. Similarly, Wardle explains that we never really stop learning how to write. And Giovanelli explains that with revision, we never stop learning about our own writing and trying to make it "better". I find this interesting because these authors stress the need to continuously keep learning about different ways to teach writing and ways to improve our own writing.

# data[].attributes.headline
My sources: Yancey, Elizabeth Wardle, and Bunn

# data[].attributes.subject
My sources: Yancey, Elizabeth Wardle, and Bunn

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about the writing strategies and the why we should attach importance to them-- because the difficulty of writing is increasing when our identities change.
I think this because I identified Yancey indicating 3 tasks for those who care about literacy: arculate and design new writing curriculum, create new model of teaching. Wardle especially emphasized the effort and writing environment. Bunn focused more on general writing strategies.
They are discussing such a content to give their suggestions for being a better writer from (mostly) educational perspective. And they also emphasized why those strategies and being a good writer is important. All of them mentioned the difficulty of writing, Bunn introduces the increasing difficulty level from high school to college, Yancey and Wardle mentioned how social environment and reading play an important role so that writing is not only about academic format, but also the feelings toward the society, life, and the world. Wardle especially emphasizes that “There is no writing in general, and thus no single class or workshop or experience can teach people to write.”, and we should “A better conception of writing is one in which we all remember (realistically) our own experiences learning to write in different situations”
I find this interesting because being a good writer is meaningful to everyone, as they have mentioned in their original articles, almost everyone need to at least do well on writing, for writing can be one of the main potagonists in life.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about the potential relationship between writing and reading.
I think this because I identified Yancey introduces the complex relationship from 21century that only reading got people's attention and only few people write in that time, Carillo suggests a way to improve their relationship, he states that reading and writing should be learned simultaneously that they can be learn well in the same time, Bunn exactly introduces a way to use the relationship between them to learn how to write.
I think they are talking about this because as technological progress, writing was known by more people and they started to use writing to communicate. In this case, this situation provides a background for people to explore more about writing and their relationship, which makes many authors begin to introduce the efficient way of writing by using their relationship in Carillo and Bunn's reading.

I find this interesting because they give people a clear perspective of why we learn writing now and how to write under their close relationship. Yancey provides background and gives several general suggestions while Carillo and Bunn focus more on specific, detailed ways of writing well.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about strategies of being an excellent writer.
I think this because I identified Yancey states that we can use many tools to write and create in this society nowadays, Wardle says that we cannot just write in general and we need to connect to the reality, Giovanelli talks about the importance of revision and it's a necessary process repeating/occuring as a pattern in these texts.
I think they are talking about this because it's important for us to know about how writing influences education and our society, and people should aware that writing has close connections with our daily life.
I find this interesting because they point out a problem that people nowadays split writing and our daily routine into different part. There are many people busy with their jobs but they cannot even write a complete passage. Writing is a necessity and our culture cannot exit without it. It also plays a vital part in education and help all of us record our life and storage knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about the evolution of literacy. I think this because I identified Yancey describing writing changes as history evolves. Carillo explains reading and writing are related closer. Bunn mentioned a new method of reading to improve writing. They are talking about this thing revealing that literacy is constantly changing, including people's attitudes towards literacy, their learning methods, and the relationship between writing and reading. I find this interesting because I also learn literacy to some extent. The discussion of the three scholars can deepen my understanding of literacy.

At the same time, we are also caught in the torrent of literary evolution.

By knowing how literature evolved, we can get more creative ideas and actively participate in reforming them.

# data[].attributes.body
In their articles, these three authors appear to be having a conversation about the products of the current writing curriculum. I think this because I identified Yancey describing the negative association people have with writing since it relates to unpleasant work, Wardle details misconceptions education causes for students approaching new writing tasks, and Giovanelli describes revision as a vital tool for writing—a strategy with negative stigma. They address these subjects to highlight how the teaching structure of English literacy encourages generalized and unclear writing, calling for revision to the curriculum which overcomplicated the composition experiences of students. I found this interesting because the authors seemed to have discovered the reason why writing is disliked among the majority of students from present and past. Teaching students a new curriculum we consider “correct” in the modern day better prepares new generations for higher level education and employment opportunities. I am intrigued by the ideal that a subject like composition has the potential for improvement so others may have a more beneficial and friendlier interaction with writing.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about Writing as connectivity.
I think this because I identified Giovanelli says that writing is revision and revision is a response to readers, it connected the writer and readers. Wardle think that everything a writer does was influenced by the environment he live in, and this means writer connect to social. They talk about these things to emphasize the importance of writing connectivity, Because we are writing to share information to others, without it, our writing will be meaningless.I find this interesting because when I think this idea deeply, I realize how true that is. Like Yancey says, with 21st century, we have more method to share our information by social media, text message, all those things is writing. So we are keep use these methods to establish contact with others. What interest me is, that in the article of Giovanelli and Wardle had mention it too.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about the change of writing.
I think this because I identified  Yancey points out that with time passing, people change their writing methods. Besides, more people are willing to pay their attention to writing, not only limited in reading as before. For Pattanayak, she says that there’s no formal, unique template for writing. Writers should change their style or structure based on what they want to write. Bunn also mentions change. She claims the reason why readers should be read like writers is that , by doing so, readers can improve their writing skills.

repeating/occuring as a pattern in these texts. I think they are talking about this because these changes are caused by many other changes. Writing has not only spontaneous changes, but also changes due to other reasons. Through this phenomenon, we can see that writing covers a wide range of fields. This further illustrates the importance of writing. I find this interesting because these changes can be seen that the progress of society is positively correlated with the progress of writing.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about  How to improve people's writing
I think this because I identified  Yancey describe developing new models of writing, Mike Bunn mentioned we have to act like a writer even during the reading. Elizabeth said we can not writing in the general, we should connect more sources
I think they are talking about this because writing plays an important role in our life. everyone wants to improve their writing and be more confident during writing.
I find this interesting because writing is a good way to benefit people in many parts of their lives. Our world is constituted by word.
These ideas encourage me because those articles seem to help us advance.  Mike Bunn and Elizabeth indicate some methods and echo Yancey's idea.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about reading's importance in writing development.
I think this because I identified Yancey’s idea of reading as a form of control, Giovanelli’s reading your draft again and again in order to revise it, Wardle’s writers need to read the external sources in order to write their own writing repeating/occurring as a pattern in these texts.
I think they are talking about this because Yancey establishes a historic and ongoing problem--that reading and writing are treated differently in education and by people. Yancey ultimately emphasizes WRITING as the frontier or the newest way forward in the digital world. But the other two texts position READING as equally important--or a necessary companion to WRITING...

I find this interesting because I felt like reading is not only benefits our knowledge storage but could also help writing development. People used to think that reading and writing are separate parts, however, nowadays, we found out that these two things are connected. Also, there is tension between these three passages, while Yancey thinks reading is overwriting, the other two texts think they are equally necessary, that's what the source is interesting about.

# data[].attributes.body
These three scholars seem to be having a conversation about reading and learning.
I think this because I identified Yancey mentions that reading is a control. The subtext means the readers are always receptors to absorb information from reading. Bunn’s article notes that reading like a writer is a method of learning the writing techniques during the reading repeating/occurring as a pattern in these texts.
I think they are talking about this because they may want to intense that reading is one of the crucial elements of writing.
I find this interesting because these articles afford a new way to improve writing, focusing on reading rather than writing itself. Writing is more like a process to output, but reading is a process of absorbing information. Thus, the method of reading to learn to improve writing may be a more efficient way to improve writing than focusing on writing itself.