Catherine Closi

In the past years, much research has been done on writing processes. Sandra Pearl,
Professor of English at Herbert Lehmann College, did a research study using a Think
Aloud method. This method proved to be helpful for unskilled writers. It is still used
today, however, I believe revisions can be made within the method. Im a college student,
and I did my own research on my writing process using both a daily log and the think
aloud method. Reviewing my data, I realized there were pros and cons to using the
methods of choice for research. The overall analysis from the research gave me great
information about my writing process.
Writing is much more than just words on the page. Before the action of writing takes
place there is a lot of planning, organizing, structuring, and research to do. In beginning
to research my own writing process, I first had to read into research that has already been
done by other writers. Altogether I have read and analyzed four articles and one video.
Each of the articles had their own methods, some of which overlapped, but as a whole
they focused on writing processes.
The first article I read was Anne Lamotts Shitty First Drafts. She opened the door to
understand the struggle with beginning to write. Lamott says about some great writers she
knows that, not one of them sits down routinely feeling wildly enthusiastic and
confident. Not one of them writes elegant first drafts. This quote shuts down any
perfectionist part of an individual. This quote is the realization that everyone has trouble
with the start of writing. Through reading Lamott, it can be inferred that the process of
writing begins, much of the time, with panic and worrisome (Lamott, 1994).
Secondly I read an article by Mike Rose called Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the
Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist Analysis of Writers Block. His article explains
rules constricting writers ability to, in fact, write. Such rules that impede creative
thought are having good flow, using appropriate and efficient transitions, having claims
and supports, proving your topic or thesis, and having a good introduction that isnt
repeated for your conclusion. Rose talks about algorithms and heuristics. Algorithms are
the rules restricting writers, while heuristics are the guidelines that may or may not be
followed (Rose, 1980). After reading the piece by Mike Rose, I listened to a video by
Stephen Fry called "Kinetic Typography - Language. He talks about how people focus
on the rules of grammar while reading rather than the message that is meant to get across
to the reader.
The third article I read was Paul Priors Tracing Process: How Texts Come Into
Being. Paul Prior, professor of English at the center for writing studies, used the think
aloud method in his article about writing processes. Prior makes one point about knowing
that everything that comes before a final draft is important. The information led up to the
final piece is contextual record and great to look back on for reference. I found it
interesting that with keeping hold of all the information and tracing back a writers
process can open up a structure of participation too. This structure of participation
includes a speaker, a writer, and the future initiator. Another topic Prior dwelled on is
that co-authorship can be unavoidable at times. The example showed by Prior is teachers
and students working on essays. It is true that teachers and professors have a major
impact on a final writing piece. One idea about the unavoidable co-authorship is with too
many participants helping you write a piece, theres a fear of loosing the your (the

original writers) voice/view. While reading Priors passages, I had an A-ha moment.
Prior states how writing is developed from other writing. Thus, all writing is linked up in
some sort of way, which is a thought that puts me to ease (Prior, 2004).
The last article Ive reviewed was Sondra Pearls The Composing Processes of
Unskilled College Writers. Pearl showed commonly used editing problems of
students. Selective perception and egocentricity are two editing problems that are similar
because they both leave the audience or reader confused. Pearl also wrote about
implications for teaching and research at the end of the article. Pearl thus explained that
there were ways to teach unskilled writers (Pearl, 1979).
Throughout reviewing the different articles, I simultaneously reviewed my own
writing process. Assessing writers block with my own writing processes comes from
reading Mike Rose and Lamott. Writers block inevitably affects everyone no matter
what. At least, that is what I believe. However, when it comes to writers block, it is a
product of rushing to make deadlines, like Rose mentioned. I, personally, am a huge
planner. When given a big writing assignment, I first pull out my calendar and mark
down the due date. Then I take two to two and a half weeks before then and write in
checkpoints. These check points are as followed: ideas or topics by days two, research
information for three days, thesis by day five, and first rough draft by the end of the first
week. I do my best in planning so I never have to feel the tension or fear of rushing to the
last minute to get things done. Nevertheless, I still get writers block. My writers block is
a time when I have realized my brain has been working to hard and needs a break.
After reading Paul Prior, I came up with a few thoughts on my writing process when I
create responses for my ENC1101 class discussions. I know that I read the passages
paragraph by paragraph. As I read, I find that my mind interrupts me and if I dont
acknowledge the interruption right away, then Ill never be able to remember or
incorporate it. Therefore, paragraph-by-paragraph, I may highlight a word or phrase and
jot down side notes. This process ultimately all becomes part of the final text I write in
my responses for these discussions.
While reading Sandra Pearls article, I evaluated my own editing process. I know that
I proof read as I go. I also know that I am not the kind of editor that goes by sound to
figure out if the word choice or grammar is correct. I dont do that because I have a wellrounded grammatical background. In my opinion, I think, that if anyone goes by sound to
edit, it is only going to hurt or confuse him or her in the process.

Reading and reviewing all these articles gave way for me to then make my own
research and use methods to review my personal writing process. I used two methods to
gather research. Firstly, I created a daily log of all the times I read and wrote over six
days. I made two charts for each day. One chart was just for reading and writing and then
had columns that evaluated those logs. The other chart was for things I did routinely such
as meals, entertainment, chores, errands, and exercise. I only had columns in the chart to
evaluate the reading and writing. In the columns I had to label the activity, rank the
intensity, rank the affect, rank the productivity, label the media used, label interruptions,
label other thoughts, label the environment, label the motivation, and lastly label
any contributors.
The overall data gave me great insight to the big picture of my writing process. The
big picture is noticing certain patterns such as environment and time. I noticed I like to be
at home in my room or be at the library while doing work. Another pattern was that I do
work related to school in bulk and over long periods of time. I also found that I do work
mostly in the afternoon and evening. This method of using a daily log also showed me
the reality of how much reading and writing I do on a daily bases, which is a lot!
There are some flaws in my data from my research though. I did forget to list minor
logs of reading and writing, which I added after the final printed product. Such minor
logs missed were reading media such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchats. I
also forgot ESPN updates and text messages. These applications I use so frequently all
entail reading and writing.
A second method was used for researching my writing process. This method was the
think aloud method that Ive seen used in both Pearl and Priors studies. I used the think
aloud method while doing a writing assignment for my ENC1101 class. The assignment
was to read the article by Sandra Pearl and then write a discussion post in response to the
article. Therefore, I began the think aloud process by recording myself as I read aloud
and preceded to record myself as I wrote my discussion post.
My think aloud method can be described as revised from ones used in both Prior and
Pearls past studies of research. It is revised because it was executed differently. The
key revision to my think aloud method was I did not, in fact, think aloud. I couldnt.
When I read, I only read the words on the page minus a few pauses of uhs and ums.
When it came to my thoughts, I would stop the recording and write what I was thinking.

Thus, I stopped recordings five times to gather my thoughts on paper and continue
reading.
After finishing the whole process of recording myself, I coded my thoughts that I had
transcribed. I came up with seven codes. The codes are as followed: pausing (P), self
reflection (SR), distraction (D), confusion (C), summarizing/analyzing text (SA), relating to text (RT), and environment (E). After coding, I had a long string of
codes that represented my thoughts. Below is my thought process coded after
transcription.
P/C/P/D/P/SR/P/C/P/SR/P/SR/P/E/P/S-A/P/RT/P/RT/S-A/RT
From the data of coding, I notice that my thoughts stay mostly related to the work I am
focused on. The reason I did not, in fact, think aloud is because I then would have
forced thoughts to come into my head. These forced thoughts would most likely be
irrelevant to the work I should be focused on. Rather than forcing ideas to come out of
my head and mouth, I wrote exactly as thoughts came in during times of pauses within
the recordings. I think it gave me a more precise result to my thought processing;
however doing this method takes a lot of time and effort that the daily log didnt require.
Some may wonder if one method is better than the other. In fact, both are equally
important and needed to get a full grasp of ones writing processes. The daily log gives
data of overall writing and reading in ordinary day-to-day life. The think aloud method
inspects specific details of writing process from thought processing. Together the data
collected is efficient and full encompassing. In the end, I believe using more than one
method is best and theres always room for more methods along with revisions. Still, I
am learning more about writing processes.
Works Cited
Fry, Stephen. Stephen Fry Kinetic Typography - Language. YouTube. N.p., n.d. Web. 26
Aug. 2014. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7E-aoXLZGY>.
Lamott, Anne. "Shitty First Drafts." 1994. Writing About Writing. By Elizabeth Wardle
and Doug Downs. 2nd ed. Boston: Leasa Burton, 2014. 527-31. Print.
Perl, Sondra. "The Composing Processes of Unskilled College Writers." Writing About
Writing: A College Reader. Eds. Wardle and Downs. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St.
Martins, 2011. 317-336. Print.
Prior, Paul. "Tracing Process: How Texts Come into Being." Writing About Writing: A
College Reader. Eds. Wardle and Downs. 2nd ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins,
2011. 492-526. Print.
Rose, Mike. "Rigid Rules, Inflexible Plans, and the Stifling of Language: A Cognitivist
Analysis of Writers Block." 1980. Writing About Writing. By Elizabeth Wardle
and Doug Downs. 2nd ed. Boston: Leasa Burton, 2014. 527-31. Print.