|
French
The principle of the process approach is shared by composition theory and la didactique de l’écrit at least partly because of the shared reference to J. Hayes and L. Flower. Its focus on producing writing and on the identifiable, recursive, and teachable stages of writing production are shared as well, and shifted focus from the produced text to the activity of producing the text, as well as the personal and shaping value of this writing. But here too the evolution and uses of the process frame differ, in particular in terms grade levels.
D. Bucheton suggests that Hayes and Flower’s key contribution was to show that “the act of writing translates cognitively into a series of mental operations (planning, translation, and revision) permanently recursive interactive” (1997, p. 38). The practical effect of this influence was an increase in activity related to self-evaluation by students (already present in the French school system) based on metalinguistic and metatextual activity before, during, and after a student’s text production (p. 38). These early influences are evolving currently in discussions about the “secondarizing” effect of certain activities on students language competencies. This period of pedagogical and theoretical development is cited for its importance in the evolution of the research object of writing as its own area within the larger domain of L1 French didactics and as motivation for shifting from an emphasis on written texts to an emphasis on their production (Barré-deMiniac, 1995, p. 97).
According to Reuter (1995) and Plane (2002), the literary approach of studying the production of texts was also key to this shift. Well-known authors are studied, in this approach, in order to understand their processes, and this helps in understanding student writers’ processes as well. In particular, for the first time, scratching-out, crossing-out, modifying and making other notes on one’s text became an object of interest instead of a sign of weakness.
edit Processus
|
English
Process, process movement: The process movement in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s is clearly described in the piece by J. Brereton in this issue. I will simply note here that the process approach has become so woven into the fabric of the discussion that it is a complete given and far less often a subject of study in the literature of the field. One key difference was in the rejection of the cognitive models of process, considered inadequate because they could not account for writing’s heterogeneity and the contexts in which disciplinary textual practices and behaviors take place (Russell, 2004). They also did not provide for revision as a dialogic act between the student and his text. The main objective of the process, that is, was the product, rather than the reflexive questioning of the writer him or herself, his choices, objectives, historicity, or the effect he could have on the process (Harris, 1994, p. 68).
edit Process
|
