Reflection: Competing Theories of Process

The study of different theories of composition is foreign terrain. Prior to reading this article, I had a very basic idea of what composition was and its purpose. I believed composition to simply be about the proper format for writing a sentence (verb goes here, noun goes there, etc.) and that its purpose was to standardize a structure that everyone could understand and expect.

After reading Competing Theories of Process, I acquired a better understanding of the position of composition within the scholastic setting. If its original purpose was to move certain individuals from a mode of composition ignorance to a mode of functioning written structure, it is now going beyond a basic ability. It is now in a place of answering not only how (with several different answers to how) but also why; how should composition be taught and why is it important to teach it that way?

Expressive views advocate spontaneity and originality, favoring creativity over strict rules. Cognitive views advocate a structure within which all writing can improve and be assessed based on criteria. Social views extol the idea that language is communal (not individual) and that all writing has a basis within a community setting (poststructural, sociological, ethnographical, and/or marxist).

As of yet, I am not convinced that any one view is the "right" view to take. In the same way that I think political parties are an over-simplification of human opinion, I think these views of composition are attempting to compartmentalize philosophies that would work much better in coordination with one another. I believe that the social view is present in every pedagogy (whether or not is designed specifically around the social view), and that both expressive and cognitive views have scenarios where one or the other is more applicable.

Reading Response: Competing Theories of Process

The most logical place to begin responding to the competing theories of process would be to list and outline the theories of process:

• Expressive View
• Focuses on the romantic ideals of sincerity (integrity), spontaneity, and originality (natural genius over potential). It doesn't follow rules; rather, it reflects processes of creative imagination
• Cognitive View
• Introduces the "science consciousness" to composition. This view would include any heuristic approaches, as well as a sense for the audience and an awareness (and deconstruction) of egocentrism. It also points to benefits from a process of pre-writing (brainstorm) --> writing --> re-writing (revision).
• Social View
• Considers human language to be only understood via societal perspective (language is not individual). This view is further broken down into four lines:
• Poststructuralist: Introduces discourse communities to composition discussions
• Sociology: Any effort to write about self or reality comes in relation to previous texts
• Ethnography: Accounts for where one  is learning to write (family/school/work)
• Marxist: Any act of writing/teaching must be understood within a structure of power related to modes of production
• (Postprocess View is valid but not discussed)

All of the views outlined above have completely valid applications. If one is expected to teach composition to a variety of students, it is important to understand the different ways that this or that structure will apply to their future use of the tools provided. A creative writer is likely to use composition in a much more expressive way, focusing on original content and allowing narratives to develop spontaneously. However, an engineer is much more likely to require a structure with an underlying "science consciousness", and to focus on composing for audiences that may vary on the spectrum of scientific acuity.

In all cases, the writer needs to have a sense of their audience (whether it is the self or the other), and all writers can benefit from heuristic tools which allow them to adjust their composition fluidly when moving between audiences. In every case, undertones of the social view is massively present in writing. Whether you are writing for others or for self, the community you exist within (regardless of your level of interaction with that community) will have an influence on your output.