Response to Janet Emig’s “Writing as a Mode of Learning”
Emig’s article claims that, as the title would suggest, writing represents unique mode of learning. Due to the sources cited to back up her argument, as well as how her article progresses in thought, one may attribute many of the the same pros and cons of any philosophical text to this article.
The article progresses as would an argument of natural philosophy. It makes and goes into enough detail for the audience to understand a premise with enough careful thought. The author then produces another premise built off of the previous premise(s). If the audience accepts these premises, the ultimate assertion that writing represents a unique mode of learning should also be accepted. However, this relies on the audience understanding the premises and points being made, some of which the article leaves vague and thus not easily understood. Without too much trouble, though, I was able to comprehend the complexities of the article. The sources cited are another possible source of contention with the thesis.
Emig relies on a large variety of sources, some of which are similar to her own article in that they rely on philosophical or logical arguments rather than empirical evidence. This complaint is easily remedied when one reads the article with a grain of salt. This article presents a theory of learning. It forces one to self-reflect on the mental processes one goes through when writing. This is compared to similar evaluations of speaking, listening, and reading.
Other than the lack of empirical evidence, apparent in its progression and sources, Emig’s article presents a coherent and generally accepted notion on the importance of writing in education. The importance of the article does not lie in any supposed controversy in its content, rather its contribution to modern education. This article, and the train of thought provided therein, is understood in most academic communities as being responsible for the wide use of writing as a mode of learning in almost every subject and course in contemporary education. The widespread use of writing in modern education is a testament to the validity of the claims and arguments made in this article. It is through that lens that we, as writers and scholars of writing and education, may turn to Janet Emig for an answer to the question posed by moody students: “Why do we have to learn how to write?”
Link to article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/356095?acceptTC=true