• View
• Edit
• History
• Print

The Contrubutions of Janet Emig

From “Writing as a Mode of Learning”

drew them to Emig’s work: “her passionate engagement with the processes of writing, thinking, and learning; her attention to the nature and significance of the material, embodied practices of real writers (often, though not always, student writers); her theoretical and methodological pluralism; and her strong commitment to social justice”(Teaching Writing 42).

the expectations for student writing and the lack of information for the writing process, Emig continued her own education. Her dissertation on a case study involving the writing processes of twelfth graders was later published as a book, The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders. In her introduction to this book, Emig states that writing is a common activity, but “descriptions of what occurs during h unsatisfactory”(1). Emig focuses her case study on interviews with students, sessions of their pre-writing and writing activities, and samples of student writing. The students differ in their writing practices, including making verbal corrections, non-graphic planning, and reticence to choose topics that are personal.

Composing,” “Inquiry Paradigms and Writing,” and “The Tacit Tradition: The Inevitability of a Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Writing Research.” In “The Uses of the Unconscious in Composing,” her argument is that writing in the classroom does not allow students to interact with their unconscious due to time constraints, along with internal and external distraction. Textbooks on writing often ignore the involvement of the unconscious in writing for “there is no wisp or scent anywhere that composing is anything but a conscious and antiseptically efficient act”(48). She draws on Stephen Spender’s idea of Mozartians and Beethovians. A Mozartian is one “whom the creative self leads a constant and uninterrupted life of its own, serene to surface disturbances”(52). The Beethovian, on the other hand, is a struggler for the “creative self in a Beethovian is not a plummeting diver, but a plodding miner who seems at times to scoop south with his bare hands”(52). Janet Emig ends with suggestions for acknowledging these struggles in the classroom – reassess the amount of work, help students understand the evolutionary process of writing, and encourage students to explore.

perceiving actuality”(160). There are positivists, phenomenological gazers, and traditionalists. Emig focuses specifically on the differences between the positivists (scientific approach to phenomena) and phenomenologists (subjective approach to phenomena). She discusses the idea of theories, specifically looking at Bruner and Kelly. She emphasizes that we must know our theory of writing and our tradition, for “it could be said that those who neither know nor acknowledge their intellectual origins are the true bastards of the world”(166). This is a necessity because a mature paradigm is needed to judge inquiries as sufficient and there should be criteria for evaluators to consult in order to be effective.

Writing Research,” Emig raises questions concerning the characterization of composition as a discipline, who the ancestors in this tradition are, what the assumptions of these ancestors were, and the new direction of the field of study. There are certain characteristics of a shared discipline – a shared lexicon, syntax, definitions and methods of research, governing paradigms, etc. (147). There are scholars recognized for writing and rhetoric research, identified as significant by others who talk and write about them. They share a common interest and view that these studies are important, and their works supply research for the field. This list includes James Britton, James Kinneavy, Martha King, James Moffett, and more. In building her case for a tacit tradition, Emig includes nine scholars outside of rhetoric and composition: Thomas Kuhn, George Kelly, John Dewey, Michael Polanyi, Susanne Langer, Jean Piaget, Lev Vygotsky, A.R. Luria, and Eric Lenneberg. Overall, Emig combines the thought and theory of various scholars both within and outside the field of composition and rhetoric to emphasize the necessity of a multidisciplinary approach for research in writing.

research related to these topics. She has explored the ideas of the brain and its function as it relates to writing, not to mention the stages of writing development from childhood through adolescence and adulthood and they relate to the studies of psychologists like Vygotsky. Janet Emig’s rhetoric and composition career has been dedicated to the why and how of writing rather than the product. She has also invested much of her career in focusing on the theory and traditions in rhetoric and composition and the influence of other disciplines on writing, subjects that had previously been untouched in the field. Emig blazed the trail for researchers who followed. She opened the door to the idea that writing involves so much more than just a finished product and that all the processes leading up to that point require more attention.

in the Graduate School of Education.

Works Cited and Consulted