Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Running head: Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Literature Review of “Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” by Nancy Sommers Linda Black Texas Woman’s University

Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Who is Nancy Sommers? Professor, essayist, blogger, and textbook writer Teaches at Harvard’s Graduate School of Education (Dept. Chair) for 20 years Leads a “Teachers as Writers” initiative at Harvard Previously at the University of Oklahoma, Rutgers University, Boston University, Monmouth College

Nancy Sommers’ Writing Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Nancy Sommers’ Writing “Revision Strategies of Student Writers” and “Responding to Student Writing” are two of her most widely-read articles. Some other articles by her “The Need for Theory in Composition Research” College Composition and Communication, 1979, Vol. 30(1), pp. 46-49 “Responding to Student Writing” College Composition and Communication, 1982, Vol. 33 (2), pp. 148-156 “Between the Drafts” College Composition and Communication, 1992 Feb., Vol. 43(1), pp. 23-31 “The Call of Research: A Longitudinal View of Writing Development” College Composition and Communication, 2008 Sept, Vol. 60(1), pp. 152-164 “Evocative Objects: Reflection on Teaching, Learning, and Living” College English, 2012 Mar, Vol.74(4), pp. 325-250 She has written several textbooks as well, including Hacker Handbooks (teaching handbooks).

Background on Journal in which “Revision Strategies” Appears Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Background on Journal in which “Revision Strategies” Appears “Revision Strategies of Student Writers and Experienced Adult Writers” first published in College Composition and Communication in December 1980. CCC is the journal of the National Council of Teachers of English peer-reviewed journal started in 1949 dedicated to rhetoric theory, particularly college-level writing TWU has an online subscription a favorite of Sommers; she has written 19 articles in CCCC

Context in the Field of Rhetoric Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Context in the Field of Rhetoric “Revision Strategies” article appears eight years after Donald M. Murray’s “Teaching Writing as a Process, Not Product” (1972) one year after Sondra Perl’s “The Composing Process of Unskilled College Writers” (1979) in 1980, a time when Richard Fulkerson says process was “still a relatively new idea” (Fulkerson, 2005, p. 656) Fulkerson calls Sommers’ work “pioneering” in the area of “process teaching” (Fulkerson, 2005, p. 656). Lindemann quotes this article in her 4th edition of Rhetoric for Writing Teachers (2001) in the chapter on Teaching Rewriting.

Context of Sommers’ Previous Work Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Context of Sommers’ Previous Work “Revision Strategies” is a follow-up to her previous articles “The Need for Theory in Composition Research” from College Composition and Communication, 1979, Vol. 30(1), pp. 46-49 a 1978 “Counterpoint” critique of Sharon Crowley’s “Composing Process” from a 1977 edition of College Composition and Communication In both previous articles she asserts that composition research up to that point had focused on composition as a series of “discrete, temporal states” which imply a set beginning and a set end and that they happen at a specific point in time (Sommers, 1979, p. 46) previous studies lack “a clearly articulated theoretical base” (Sommers, 1979, p. 46) writing is “both linear and recursive” (Sommers, 1978, p. 210) writing should be thought of as a hierarchy of a set of sub-processes, not stages the field needs a new set of vocabulary to describe these sub-processes revision/rewriting was previously considered the last stage of the writing process, a clean-up of sorts, but needs attention as in important recursive process the field needs a theoretical study of revision specifically critical of Rohman and Britton

Summary and Context of “Revision Strategies” Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Summary and Context of “Revision Strategies” Sommers saw a need for more focus on the recursive nature of the writing process decided to develop her own research as a result; studied students at Boston University and the University of Oklahoma, where she was teaching specifically critical of D. Gordon Rohman and Albert O. Wlecke, in “Pre-writing: The Construction and Application of Models for Concept Formation in Writing,” Cooperative Research Project No. 2174 (1975) James Britton, et al., The Development of Writing Abilities (1975) Hillocks refers to this study as well, noting it useful in providing “an empirical test of a more complex set of categories of discourse” than previously identified (1986). says their models are too linear says their models are fashioned on speech, which is linear, “’irreversible’” (Sommers, p. 44) Britton relays more about the relationship between speech and expressivist writing in last week’s reading, “Spectator Role and the Beginnings of Writing” (1982) but much more broadly discusses the relationship of experience, reading, storytelling, observation, etc. in addition to speech. their models reduce “revision” to “no more than an afterthought” (Sommers, p. 44)

Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Summary and Context of “Revision Strategies” Sommers supports the viewpoints of Ferdinand De Saussure – Swiss linguist (1857-1913) reintroduced approach to linguistics called structuralism elements of language are a system of signs; focused on the underlying system of language, not on the use of language linguistic signs were composed of two parts a signifier (the sound pattern of a word) and the signified (the concept or meaning of the word) advocated the study of the synchronic aspect of language, meaning its current state Jonathan Culler (writing about Saussure) in Saussure (1976) Roland Barthes “Writers, Intellectuals, Teachers,” in Image-Music-Text (1977) and quoted from Writing Degree Zero and Elements of Semiology (1968) Barthes is considered to subscribe to De Saussure’s structuralist approach. Sommers cites Course in General Linguistics (1966) written by De Saussure’s colleagues after his death

Summary and Context of “Revision Strategies” Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” Summary and Context of “Revision Strategies” Sommers criticizes Britton (1908 – 1994) who was following the work of Roman Jakobson (1896 – 1982). Jakobson also a structuralist linguist, but a modern structuralist part of the Prague School of structuralism Prague School departed from De Saussure’s fundamental structuralism in that they believed linguistics includes the study of both the synchronic (current meanings in language)and the diachronic (how language changes over time) Prague School also sought to identify relationships of sounds (phonemes) in a language, not just the study of semantics these concepts are now the general standard in modern linguistics Britton relates some of these phonological concepts in “Spectator Role and the Beginnings of Writing” (Britton, 1982) (see p. 161 in particular). Conclusion Sommers saw the revision process and writers’ perceptions of the revision process as the key difference between students and experienced writers. challenges the field to encourage writers to focus on “dissonance” “Students need to seek the dissonance of discovery” and focus on “the possibility of revision” (Sommers, 1980, p. 53). does not provide specifics on how to do this in this particular piece Lindemann’s book provides more specific techniques.

Literary Review of "Revision Strategies" Literature Review of “Revision Strategies” References Britton, J. (1982) Spectator role and the beginnings of writing. In V. Villanueva & K. Arola (Eds), Cross-Talk in Comp Theory, (pp. 151-173). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. College Composition and Communication, 9/2/2014, http://www.ncte.org/cccc/ccc Fulkerson, R. (2005). Composition at the turn of the twenty-first century. College Composition and Communication, (56,2), 654-687. Hacker handbooks: Meet Nancy Sommers. Retrieved from http://pages.mail.bfwpub.com/hackerhandbooks/authors/Sommers/ Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Reading and Communication Skills. Jakobson vs. Saussure. New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Roman_Jakobson Lindemann, E. (2001). A rhetoric for writing teachers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Sommers, N. (1978). Counterstatement. College Composition and Communication (29,2), 209-211. Sommers, N. (1979). The need for theory in composition research. College Composition and Communication, (30,1), 46-49. Sommers, N. (1980). Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult writers. In V. Villanueva & K. Arola (Eds), Cross-Talk in Comp Theory, (pp. 43-54). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Structuralism. New World Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Structuralism#Structuralism_in_linguistics