Emig "Non-Magical Thinking: Presenting Writing Developmentally in Schools" by Geri

Emig begins right off by saying that "we are wired with the ability to write", so there isn't a 'set in stone' set of developmental stages or steps we go through in order to be ready to be writers.  According to Emig, we are born with the natural inclination to write. She says that "we are born with the ability to learn to write".  But then she also says that teachers teach writing as if the student does not already come in with some skills.  Many children come to school with having already done some writing because they have been learning it since they were born.  Children see writing in books, signs, lists and watch their parents write.  Their scribbling is their writing, and I know when I would ask my own children what they wrote, they would be able to tell me whole stories that were in their heads, that they were sure was in that scribbling. What struck a chord for me was when she said  (p. 140) that "writers of all ages as frequently work from wholes to parts as from parts to wholes".  The reason this struck me is because I hate story webs and outlines.  I don't write like that, so now I feel guilty for making my students do it. Then again, I have some students that need the story webs and outlines just to get started.  I will still teach how to do those things, but I will no longer require them to create one.  I have done that because I would be considered a 'bad' writing teacher if I didn't.  My students need to know about graphic organizers and how to help themselves get started, but it doesn't have to be a required sheet of paper. Another thought to take with me (p. 140) is "The processes of writing do not proceed in a linear sequence".  This seems intuitive, but I have been taught to teach writing in a linear sequence. I like that Emig does not completely poo-poo Moffett and other academics that use developmental sequences to understand where a child's writing is and where it is going. I like how Emig says that telling students that writing is just talking with words is an "over generalization" and not an effective way to teach children how to write (p. 143).  I've never understood those directions to write the way I talk - that would be terrible.  One last thing (p. 144), in order to effectively teach writing, is that we, the teachers, "can help others learn to write when themselves (we) become learners and writers."