# data[].attributes.body
PART 1:  DUE Friday, FEBRUARY 4 BY 11:59 PM.
Use the template below to write an original post of at least 200 words.

Scholars seem to be talking about (concept).  I know this because I saw __(list SPECIFIC ideas, concepts)__ repeating in __(list sources)__.

I think they are talking about this because _ ___________ _.

PART 2:  DUE Saturday, FEBRUARY 5 BY 11:59 PM.
Read and respond to each of your peers using the template below. Your comment on their padlet post should accept the conversation your peer describes in their post and restate what they are saying. You can then offer additional ways to think about it.

Yes, those scholars seem to be talking about __(summarize the concept your classmate has identified)__.  Consider reviewing __(add additional readings that also discuss some aspect of concept your classmate is discussing)__ as they also talk about this.

They might also, however, be talking about __(mention other concepts or related concepts)__ and so it might be even more productive to explore the conversation in terms of __(offer additional ideas for your classmate to consider)__.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about the misinformation given within the literature community about renowned authors and their isolation. They prove this theory of isolation to be false and show many instances of how past authors used sources and peers around them to ultimately improve their writing. Not only do they discourage the idea of isolation in writing but they encourage peer review and exploring sources to develop writing.I know this because I saw many mentions of where these past authors turned to for source and different opportunities they took instead of sitting by themselves in isolation repeating in both Edward & Paz and Parrott's writing. These two authors also included many previous famous writers such as Shakespere to use as an example to make their claims stronger. I think they are talking about these concepts because they have previously seen these false claims be thrown around in literature and they also don't want upcoming writers to be discouraged and misinformed about how writing is meant to be improved. In addition, they also want to effectively show what actually makes writing a better experience and development than sitting in isolation while suggesting beneficial ways such as peer review, giving time to yourself for ideas and seeking sources from the outside.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how writing can be built on or refined. I know this because I saw how revision was necessary in all types of writing and how writers bring in inspiration from others; this was repeated in Lamott’s, Edward and Paz’s, and Giovanelli’s article reading.I think they are talking about this because not all writing starts off too great. The process of writing takes time even if it starts off with something that seems too far fetched. The “shitty first draft” can be seen in Lamott’s article where ideas in the first instance of writing might be an entanglement of ideas. This entanglement has to be refined through the process of revision. As you go through the vines and leaves of the first draft, correcting areas of writing that lack substance, it brings more development to your writing. To make the most efficient revisions, the revisions should actually impact the writing (Giovanelli). Revisions become meaningless when there is no purpose for that change. What can you change about your writing? Ideas from others around just might be the thing you’re looking for. As you revise and add more to your current ideas, there might be that spark someone said to you some time in the past. Writing is a social process, being inspired from others and developing that idea into your own idea (Edward and Paz). As you compile ideas and make meaningful revisions to your writing it develops the text into something that is more complex in comparison to the first draft. This new complexity to your writing shows how writing can be built or developed upon from a bad base.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how perfect writing is conceived. They break down the myth of perfect writing, showing that writing is a process, not a product. I know this because I saw many authors such as Lamott, Edward and Paz, Murray, and Parrott, that debunk the theory of “perfect writing.” They mention that the writing process is divided into three stages: brainstorming, prewriting, and revisions. However, all three processes invite writers to collaborate among peers, and emphasizes that writing is meant to be changed and edited throughout the whole process. Murray and Parrot emphasize on the importance of the prewriting stage, as it is the foundation where ideas are created. Edward and Paz mention Shakespeare’s writing process, as a way to show how collaborating among peers can improve writing. In addition, Lamott shows the reality of writing, by sharing her own experience on writing. I think they are talking about this because many people forget the importance of the prewriting stage, and only look at the finished product. People tend to use famous writers as examples of writing, and forget that it takes time and practice to get to “perfection.” The myth has negatively impacted writers, and discourages them from writing because they are unable to attain that unrealistic goal.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seemed to be talking about how school systems affect students' writing abilities. I know this because I saw Flaherty and Carillo pointing out flaws in many schools' curriculum that are negatively affecting students. Flaherty mentions how the quality of the writing assignments affect how much effort students put it. If it simply asks them to inform, it doesn't allow students to think critically about new ideas and develop their skills. Then goes into detail about how WAC programs are solving this problem. Carillo also emphasizes how in many schools tend to prioritize writing over reading when in reality they should be simultaneously. Miller and Schulz and Yancy also mention new types of curriculum for teaching. Miller and Schulz emphasizes how beneficial teaching multiple literacies at once will greatly improve students' writing since they are practicing all of their literacy aspects. Yancy also advocates for a change in the curriculum due to the changes we have seen in our culture since the 20th century. I think they are talking about this because they are trying to figure out the best model to effectively help students improve their writing skills. Each of these sources point out some flaw in the curriculum at the moment and offer a solution to better help students.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how students are misguidedly taught the expectations of college level writing. I know this because I see recurring concepts of ways students can become better college writers, repeating in Bunn’s and Strong’s articles. Strong argues that high school teachers do not properly teach their students what college professors expect from their students, when writing. In a high school environment, students just write to get an assignment done and get the credit for it. Whereas in a college environment, students are expected to think about what they are going to write, so that they can put thought and meaning into their response. Students are expected to analyze a piece of text carefully, so that they can write out their own thoughts and feelings about what they have read. Professors do not want their student to give a simple nor obvious response, otherwise they would be re-reading he same answer over and over again. A point that Bunn makes is that students are also expected to read like a writer, which means that the reader must carefully read the piece of text that way they are able to pick up on the authors writing techniques. In high school, students are not taught to read like a writer because teachers and students are just going through the motion of getting things done. Whereas, in college, professors encourage their students to carefully read and analyze what they are reading because they can later on decided weather or not they would like to include the writing techniques they have learned, in their own writing. I think they discuss these things because high school teachers do not teach their students how to write a proper paper at a college level.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how students are misguided onto the conceptions regarding writing. This path then leads to discouraged mindsets and insecurity in writings for these writers. This common occurrence has been shown in Flaherty’s, Carillo’s, Edward’s and Paz’s, and Murray’s writings. Flaherty informs readers that the importance of what professors assign to students is just as important as what the students write. Oftenly, professors are not clear enough regarding what they expect from their students when they create assignments. Carillo briefcases her strong opinions regarding reading and writing curriculums needing to be taught together, neither at the expense of another. As students progress from elementary to college, there is a detercating of the emphasis of reading while the importance of writing increases. Edward and Paz write that people are misguided that only legends like Shakespeare, Emerson, and Orwell can be genius writers. These legendary writers are viewed highly by educators that it brings pressure onto student writers to be “original” and to produce new ideas. Murray stresses the importance of prewriting, the stage he views as the most essential to writing processes. He claims that teachers brush it off and rather focus too much on paper completion. These sources highlight some of the expectations that are brought upon students by educators and how their significance greatly impacts the student writers’ performances.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about the barriers of writing and what can be done to overcome these barriers. I know this because I saw prewriting, revision, and sources “calling out” the education system when it comes to learning English repeating in most if not all the sources. Though it may seem simple, the sources have proven that these branches of writing are more complex than they seem. I think they are talking about this because they are trying to improve the learning of English in the education system and writers' skills (in general). Giles is part of the reflection branch as it discusses the process of reflection and its role in writing. Very similar to Bunn's statement on Reading Like a Writer. Bunn's technique of Reading Like a Writer is also part of the branch of reflection because it allows a writer to look over/shape their work. Then there are sources like Yancey that directly stated that the problem is in our education system/ways of teaching. Yancey states that the way of teaching English should have changed with the revolutionization of technology. Though there are also sources that are intertwined with multiple branches, like Edward and Paz. Authorship making others second guess their writing skills is part of the prewriting stage for some writers because it can prevent them from writing. Though it is also in the reflection branch because writers use others' work, to give them a sense of what direction they’d like to take with their writing. Even so, Edward and Paz are also intertwined with the “calling out the education system” branch because teachers can prevent this from happening by spending more time on the prewriting stage. However, it is difficult to do so by the way the education system was made. Therefore, the sources in UWP 7 have made it evident that they are trying to help students/writers in their writing.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be discussing the topic of the invention process of writing. This is evident as they explained certain strategies involved that could expedite the process, such as noticing the word choices an author makes, or their style of writing, as well as reconstructing possible misconceptions about initial drafts. These strategies are evident in Bunn, Lamott, and Murray. Bunn’s strategies involve noticing patterns in texts, and replicating the patterns as well as asking oneself questions as they are writing. They are talking about this as many writers tend to have struggles while figuring out how to even start to write their piece to fit certain criteria. These scholars want to help writers to realize that writing is experimental, and isn’t a one and done task. Writers can have multiple drafts before they ever get into the revision process, and oftentimes, writing pieces we may see as perfect may have started from something quite unimpressive. Lamott and Murray try to make it clear that it is normal for early drafts to be unorganized, and a clutter. You should still be mindful of what you are writing, making certain choices to fit certain areas of your goal, but this shouldn’t stop you from writing a few stray thoughts. The most important thing is to have something written out on paper.  As long as you have something written down, it gives you material to work with when the revision process comes.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seems to be talking about our first times writing aren't always going to be perfect and it takes time in order for one to become what is deemed a "good writer" . I know this because I saw over and over again how writing your first draft would not always be perfect and in order to creating good writing there needs to be constant   important revision of your own work that adds to your topic repeating in Lamott and Parrott , and Edward & Paz readings. I think they are talking about this because a lot of young writers struggle with their writing confidence and feel as though the first time spitting their ideas on a piece of paper should be this masterpiece. This is unfortunately not true because we are not all "naturally" talented at this and it does take extra effort to create something like that like revisions and asking for help from other people because it can help get a better understanding at keeping your topic consistent. Revisions are very important in this writing process because it helps refine the ideas that you are putting down on that first draft , however revisions should not be made just to make a change. Revisions should be used in your writing when the add to ones overall topic because there are such things as bad revisions.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be discussing steps we can take as writers, and educators of writers to improve our skills. I know this because I saw the overarching theme of advancement and change repeating in sources from Parrott, Carillo, Flaherty, Strong, and Bunn. Many of them propose different ideas, but they all fall into the bigger picture of calling for some kind of change. For example, they discuss improving one's writing skills by thinking deeply when reading someone else’s work. They discuss changing our ways of thinking when it comes to our writing process, and the idea that the educators’ approaches to teaching writing could use some tweaking is pretty consistent in the sources. I think they are talking about this because they see that the world is adapting around us while our English skills as students are staying the same or declining as we move toward the real world. The authors are giving us advice and information that we may not have considered before, whether it be because we simply didn’t know about it, or wasn’t sure if it applied to us or not. They show that they care about making a difference and helping us as writers acknowledge where we can improve, because as they mention, everyone can become a better writer. .

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be discussing how the form of education in school affects students' abilities, discussing how they have trouble transitioning from high school years to college writing. I know this because I saw Bunn and Flaherty and Yancy mention in their high school school course that school assignments are more like tasks than writing for students, and that in most cases students just complete the task based on what they have been given, so they do not sikao the essay and do not use their own independent thinking and critical perspective to see the problem. Later in the article, Yancy analyzes the new ways in which writing should include multiple sources of delivery to follow the changing times through subpoints. I also learned through a portion of Miller and Yancy's article that according to the 21st century Internet, contemporary writing has many online references and the development of online forums that make it possible for everyone to be good writers. Also, Edward & Paz's work illustrates the idea that students should learn the characteristics of multiple famous writers and assimilate them into their own knowledge by interweaving them. In their own way, these authors point out the shortcomings of current education and draw solutions based on facts.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how writing is different than what we think it is. Most people think that perfect authors will sit down on a perfect day, writing their next perfect book, all on the same day. However, this is far from truth. I know this because I saw how multiple drafts are extremely necessary when writing a good paper repeating in Lamott and Murray's articles. Both of these authors write about exactly how hard it is to write something. I think they are talking about this because they want to show the public readers that not everything in the writing world are as easy as everyone thinks. Many readers think that authors pump out a book a day as if it were that simple. The writing process as Murray recalls is extremely time consuming and exhausting. Authors must go through a process before they even start writing. This is what Murray calls rehearsal or the pre-writing process. Rehearsal is when the writer will go around just randomly saying words that are on top of their head. When something blossoms into an idea, the writer will jot it down on a notepad and save it for later use. In Lamott's book chapter, she constantly talks about how first drafts are meant to be awful and are seen as a stepping stone. She wants her audience to know just what it takes for writers to reach the perfect place they desire.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about writing in general and how writing and its process can be developed to meet specific needs or to entertain a targeted audience. I know this because I saw how prewriting and revision are valuable parts of the whole writing process, writing is about participation and sharing, and understanding your audience is important in composition, writing is considered as a way of thinking, people are not born good writers, but you have to practice to become a better writer, and writing is a social interaction because a writer always writes for an audience repeating in Write before writing, Some People are Just Born Good Writers, Strong Writing and Writers don’t need revision, How do I Write a Text for College? Making the Transition from High School Writing, Writing in the 21st Century. I think they are talking about this because they established the idea that no one writes for themselves but always for an audience. This makes writing a type of social interaction resulting in affecting the way people and writers, in particular, are approaching writing. To illustrate, students write for their teachers (audience), and usually, the time frame given by the teachers does not consider the prewriting process which could eventually influence the writing process the students are doing.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about the different portray of writing through college and high school and what these portray. We can see this through multiple illustrations given in class such by Bunns and Parrot. Both these authors stated that high school writing focused their perspecitve of what good writing in vs how college and universities consider good writing. Colleges depict good writing through format, punctuation and characterization. This is different though college as professors want you to learn and discover new idea. Through these ideologies and having idea showing how one can be creative with their writing, students can start to learn and adapt.  Bunns had stated numerous times that students teach one was of writing. This affects their stylistic views and how the perceive what good writing is. High school instructors what to drill concepts to where students follow a certain curriculum in order to attain good writing skills. This statement was contradicted through how college professors view good writing. Inspiration and creativity, experimentation on how students should write is what professors look for. Analyzing key concepts and using different sources to back up your statements is how Bunn described good writing through college. Parrot had also referenced how students don't refine these skills in high school. Rather they start struggling with the course as the transition writing from high school to college was never taught. Students only focused on having a one set mind as grades depicted their future. In the case of the college, how you present your writing depicts your grade.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about ways that students can be improving their writing skills despite what the high school curriculum taught them. I know this because I saw how authors put an emphasis on the importance of the pre-writing and revision process repeating in Giovanelli’s, Lamott’s, Sammie’s, and Murray’s texts. I think they are talking about this because most people are focused on the final product of an essay and they often overlook the steps that it takes to get there. Perfect writing is subjective and I think part of  what the authors are trying to say is that a piece of writing will never be perfect but through the revision process, that piece of writing holds the potential to be a great or excellent essay. Lamott mentions how first drafts are never perfect and often go through the revision process. She also mentions the process of getting to the first draft is not meant to be organized and demonstrates this by her audience walking through her writing process. Similarly to Lamott, Sammie and Murray talk about how the prewriting process consists of a lot of brainstorming and requires the writer to actively look for an invention when starting their writing.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how the mind set about "people have to be gifted to be a good writer" is wrong and will negatively affect one's ability to write. I know this because I saw authors argued about the idea that some people are just born with the writing talent and for other normal writers it’s really hard to improve. Parrott write in her article that she think we should get rid of this mentality and always look for improvement. For inexperienced writers, she suggest that constantly reviewing previous work, accepting any feedback, whether good or bad, and doing the actions based on the feedback. She also mentioned that it is important to add your own voice to the work because it’s what draws the reader's attention. By following these steps everyone can become a good writer. The similar ides also demonstrates in Edward and Paz’s article, they mentioned that in literature classes, students are exposed to writers known as intellectual geniuses, such as Shakespeare, Orwell and Emerson. They were told that these were real writers, forming a kind of mindset that writing should be free, easy and natural. However, in reality writing is hard, so unrealistic expectations should not be imposed on students, such as you have to meet certain requirements to become a writer. Because then they can't reach their full potential. Teachers should teach their students that they don’t have to have preternatural intelligence or talent to succeed as a writer. I think they are talking about this because they want people to understand that writing can be challenging, so don't be afraid to make a mess of it. Don't be afraid to get started. Every writing experiments is valuable.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about how college students can better their writing after high school. I know this because I saw mentions of revision, reflective writing, drafts, and writing before the draft, repeating in Giovanelli’s, Giles', Lamott's, and Murray's writing. They include their own methods of writing and how they prefer to get started or edit their papers. Lamott and Murray speak about what to do before you even get started on writing. They take a different approach than immediately writing, they write before the final draft with things such as lists or first drafts to get to the final draft. Giovanelli and Giles both write on what to do after you have finished the writing, and they have examples in their writing on how the suggest to revise and reflect on our writing. These authors all have the same thing in common in that they don't expect perfection the first time that they write. Other writers such as Parrott and Edward and Paz, wrote on how there are no such things as good writers and they they only had the advantage of learning these techniques earlier than others. I think they are writing about this because freshmen in college get discouraged once they realize that they aren't the good writers they thought they were and they see others doing better. These texts can be seen as encouraging and giving advice to these students in order to help them improve for college level writing.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about the writing process and how college students are being misguided by the high unrealistic expectations that are set to them when it comes to writing. Most of the writers are calling out the struggles of many students. I know this because I saw how revision is an important step when writing, how first drafts are not meant to be perfect, and how prewriting is a valuable part of the writing process repeating in the following readings “Reflective Writing and the Revisions process: What were you thinking,” ”Shitty first Drafts,” and “Write before writing.” I think they are talking about this because many students believe that professional writers compose perfect writing without revising their work, without composing a first draft where they just think so the writers are trying to get the students out of that state of mind because it’s unrealistic. Giles in her writing mentions that reflectiveness is something you must do in order to think about one’s own thinking. Similarly to a claim Lamott makes about how first drafts are not meant to be perfect are just meant to get one’s ideas down and then go back and revise your thoughts. Murray also, like Lamott, thinks that the process before the writing process is an important step to take. They both think that organizing your thoughts first is what will make you successful in composing good writing. The contribution that all these writers are trying to make are to set realistic expectations about composing a piece of writing.

# data[].attributes.body
Scholars seem to be talking about the different portray of writing through college and high school and what these portray. We can see this through multiple illustrations given in class such by Bunns and Parrot. Both these authors stated that high school writing focused their perspecitve of what good writing in vs how college and universities consider good writing. Colleges depict good writing through format, punctuation and characterization. This is different though college as professors want you to learn and discover new idea. Through these ideologies and having idea showing how one can be creative with their writing, students can start to learn and adapt.  Bunns had stated numerous times that students teach one was of writing. This affects their stylistic views and how the perceive what good writing is. High school instructors what to drill concepts to where students follow a certain curriculum in order to attain good writing skills. This statement was contradicted through how college professors view good writing. Inspiration and creativity, experimentation on how students should write is what professors look for. Analyzing key concepts and using different sources to back up your statements is how Bunn described good writing through college. Parrot had also referenced how students don't refine these skills in high school. Rather they start struggling with the course as the transition writing from high school to college was never taught. Students only focused on having a one set mind as grades depicted their future. In the case of the college, how you present your writing depicts your grade.