Light 2002 Creative Writing in Higher Education

From the Personal to the Public: Conceptions of Creative Writing in Higher Education
Author(s): Gregory Light

Source: Higher Education, Vol. 43, No. 2 (Mar., 2002), pp. 257-276
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3447545
Accessed: 21-06-2015 10:32 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Higher Education.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 150.108.161.71 on Sun, 21 Jun 2015 10:32:53 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Higher Education 43: 257-276, 2002. 257
' ? 2002 KluwerAcademicPublishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
From the personal to the public: Conceptions of creative writing

in higher education
LIGHT
GREGORY
Searle CenterFor TeachingExcellence,NorthwesternUniversity,USA
Abstract. Much qualitativeresearchon studentlearningin higher educationhas focused on a

key distinctionbetweensurfacereproductionof 'knowledge'and a deeper understandingof it.
This distinctionhas also been foundin researchon studentpracticeandunderstandingof essay
and discursivewriting.This paperreportson results from a study of 40 interviewsconducted
with studentstaking creative writing courses at three differenthigher Pducationinstitutions
in the United Kingdom.Interviewswere conducted with students of various levels of exper-
ience and expertise in creative writing and included students taking a single undergraduate
module in creative writing and students enrolled in a highly selective Masters programin
CreativeWriting.The interviewsfocused on the students' conceptions and practiceof crea-
tive writing while taking their respective courses. The analysis of the interview transcripts
revealed an underlyingsubjectivistepistemology in the students' general assumptionsand
perceptionof the natureof CreativeWritingvis-a-vis otherforms of academicwriting.Linked
to this epistemology,the analysisdisclosed a typology of four differingconceptionsof student
understandingand practiceof creativewriting within two overall transcribingandcomposing
categoriesof conception.These categories closely resemble student'sconceptionsof writing
practicesin otherdisciplines.
Keywords: academicliteracy,conceptions of learning,conceptions of writing,creative writ-

ing, personalexperience,phenomenography,public expression,readership,studentlearning
Introduction
Much recentresearchon the experienceof studentlearningin highereduca-

tion has focused on a key distinction between surface reproductionof
'knowledge' and a deeper understandingof it (Martonet al. 1997). While
the distinctionhas been interpretedand described in ways and in language
that are distinctive to particularlearning contexts, it has been remarkably
consistent across a wide range of academic disciplines and in a wide range
of cultural contexts. Indeed, this general distinction has emerged within
researchexamininga varietyof conceptualframeworks:learningapproaches
(Martonand Saljo 1984; Ramsden 1992; Entwistle 1987), learningorienta-
tions (Richardson1995) and learningoutcomes (Dahgren 1997; Lybeckand
Marton 1988). A particularlyfertile area of research has been the identifi-
258 GREGORYLIGHT
cation and explorationof learning in terms of student 'conceptions' of an

area of study (Saljo 1979; Marton et al. 1992; Dahlgren 1997; Entwistle
and Entwistle 1992, 1997; Martonet al. 1997). This researchalso identified
a range of distinctive types of conception which can be divided into two
categories:reproducingconceptions in which the student "uses meaning",
memorises and reproducesmaterial,and transformingconceptions in which
the student"makesmeaning",understandsand transformsmaterial.
This distinction is also mirroredin an array of research on discursive
writing. Bereiterand Scardamalia(1987) reporton a range of researchfind-
ings contrastingtelling and transformingmodels of the process of writing.
They define the main differencebetween the two models as lying in the rela-
tionshipof the contentproblem-spacein which problemsof belief andknowl-
edge are workedout, and the rhetoricalproblem-spacein which problemsof
achievingthe goals of the compositionare dealt with:
The distinctivecapabilitiesof the knowledge-transformingmodel lie in
formulatingand solving problems and doing so in ways that allow a
two-way interactionbetween continuously developing knowledge and
continuouslydevelopingtext. (Bereiterand Scradamalia1987, p. 12)
Hounsell (1987), moreover,identifiedthree sub-component"core elements"

of essay-writing conceptions: data (the subject matter or material of the
essay); organisation(the structuringof the essay material)and interpretation
(the meaning given to the materialby the students) (p. 110). They provide
the basis for two general groupsof essay-writingconception: interpretative,
"cogency" (psychology) and "argument"(history); and non-interpretative,
"relevance"(psychology) and "arrangement"(history). The former group
describes"a concernwith the makingof meaning:an essay is seen as a mode
of discoursethroughwhich one makes sense of a topic or problemin a way
which is individuallydistinctive"(Hounsell 1987, p. 112). Cogency/argument
conceptions emphasise the "interpretation" sub-componentunderwhich the
two other sub-componentsare subsumed and integrated.In the relevance/
arrangementgroup of conceptions, on the other hand, a concern for "the
establishmentof meaning is absent"and the student'sown "ideas, thoughts
and opinions ... are seen as 'value added' ratherthan as the essay's main
justification" (p. 112). The data and structureof the essay are not inte-
gratedwith interpretation,but are, so to speak, floatingfree, derived"almost
incidentally"from the materialand structuresin lectures and books. Essay
writing"is seen unreflectivelyand mechanically"(Hounsell 1984, p. 121).
More recently Campbell et al. (1998) examined the relationshipof the
conceptualstructureof essays using the SOLO taxonomy (Biggs and Collis
1982) with studentaccounts of essay writing. They found similar categories
CONCEPTIONSOF CREATIVEWRITING 259
of 'underlyingconceptualisations'(p. 466) at every stage of the writing

process.
... compared to students writing essays with simple conceptual struc-
tures, students writing more complex essays engaged in processes
of reconstructionratherthan "knowledgetelling", used organisational
systems for integratingtheir notes accordingto topics or themes, built
"arguments"ratherthan "information"when structuringand drafting
their essays ... (pp. 466-467)
The currentstudy was designed to take a similar approachto investigating

studentconceptionsand understandingsof creativewriting in higher educa-
tion. In this respectthe studywas conceived to examine a kindof writingthat
has often been conceptualisedas qualitativelydifferentfrom essay writing.
Britton(1970), for example,differentiatesbetweenthreematuremodes (func-
tions) of writing which may be regarded as lying on a continuum, with
'expressive'writingin the middleflankedby 'transactional'(communicative)
writing at one end and 'poetic' writing at the other. It is a developmental
continuum, the key dynamic of which lies in a movement out from its
'expressive' centre. In both directionsthis is a "move ... from an intimate
to a more public audience"(p. 83): from expressive self to public other.Of
central importancehere, however, is the differing nature of the expressive
self in the two roles. As transactionalwritingmoves out to meet the demands
of audience, it increasingly "excludes the personal, self-revealingfeatures"
(p. 83). Moving out towards'audience'in the poetic writing,however,leads
to a focus on preciselythese personalfeatures:"theembodimentby the writer
of feelings andbeliefs becomes paramount,and what is includedin the utter-
ance may be highly personal"(p. 83). Emig (1971) makesa similardistinction
in her work, agreeing, "all student writing emanates from an expressive
impulse and that they then bifurcateinto two major modes" (p. 37) which
she calls "extensive"and "reflexive".Extensive writing is active, focusing
on the writer's interactionwith his/her situation while reflexive writing is
contemplative,focusing on what the experiencemeans for the self.
This qualitativedistinction has to some degree been noted in its rela-
tionship with higher education.Despite the growth of creative writing as a
formal discipline in higher education in Britain and even longer presence
in the United States, creativewriting remains ratherunchartedterritory.As
Bradbury (1992) writes, "... Creative Writing has come to prosper. Yet one
curiousfeatureof its growthis that ... it has generatedvery little in the way
of self analysis or theoreticalpublication".This is, to a large extent, due to
the natureof the discipline. Historically,it has not been regardedas suitable
for study in higher education,let alone an object of theoreticalstudy. Intel-
260 GREGORY
LIGHT
lectual and academicresistanceto its move into universitieshas traditionally

surfacedin the form of argumentsthat 'creativewriting' is not 'serious' and
encouragesself-indulgence.At the root of this resistanceare issues of literary
andaestheticvalue and the assumptionthatcreativetalentis personal,natural
and instinctive:something that is neither taughtnor learned nor adequately
assessed (Freeman1987; Gladwin 1987; Lawson 1990; Light 1995a).
It should be noted that while "creativewriting"has come to describethe
practiceof writing in particulargenres - mainly poetry,fiction and drama-
it has not come to describe the practice of writing 'creatively'. This paper
does not focus on creativity,butratheron studentconceptionsand experience
of a distinctivepractice,which studentsin higher educationare increasingly
engaged. It presents a structuraltypology of conceptions of creative writing
in termsof their definingfeatures.1
Method
The studydrawson the analysis of interviewaccountsof 40 CreativeWriting

studentsselected from threewriting courses at three British institutions.The
choice of course was based on two categoriesof criteria.In orderto minimise
the risk of including a narrowrange of creativewriting studentin the study,
the first criteriaemployed was "criteriaof variation",which Patton (1980)
refers to as a "maximum variation sampling strategy" (p. 102). It included
three different kinds of institutions (old university, new university, insti-
tute of adult education);different degree structures(graduate/fullprogram,
undergraduate/singlemodule, non-degree/single course); different course
structures(workshop approaches, exercise-based, mixture); differing level
of participation(full-time, part-time);varyinggenres (fiction, script writing,
poetry) and varying experience of 'being a writer'. This latter criterionis
not based on precise categories of quality or quantityof writing, but rather
on general descriptions of writing experience and interest. The distinction
is most acute between the post-graduatecourse where student selection is
highly competitiveand specificallymade with referenceto the studentalready
'being a writer',and the undergraduatecourse which cateredto a wide range
of writing experience and was open to all students,irrespectiveof whether
they had writtenanything.
In contrast,the second category of criteria, "criteriaof similarity",was
concerned with including courses that could be described as teaching the
same subject at the same time with a minimum number of students. It
includedcourses reflectingsimilarcourse orientations,inclusion of a similar
genre (fiction); access to at least ten students and offered during the same
academicyear.The firstcriterion,course orientation,concerns:
... the relationshipof the particularwriting course to the activity of

writingitself... (and) may be referredto as eitherextrinsicor intrinsic.
In the formercase, writingis primarilyregardedas an instrumentin the
study of literature(or anotherdiscipline), while in the latter case; the
course has as its primarygoal the developmentof (creative)writingas a
practicein and of itself. (Light 1992, pp. 10-11)
Both sets of criteriawere important.In the first case, the aim was to ensure
that the sample of studentsand their experience of creative writing took in
as broada range as possible. The second set of criteriawas meant to ensure
that despite the diversity of courses, and level of engagement,the students
were all engagedin a writingpracticefocused on the developmentof creative
writing as its primaryobjective. The authorattendedapproximately50% of
the teaching sessions of the three courses, becoming very familiarwith the
teachers,students,curriculumand pedagogic practicesof the courses.
All the students who took part in the study willingly agreed to do an
interviewupon request.The authorinterviewedeach of them soon after they
completed their course. The interview sample was constructedso as to be
representativeof the overall sample that took the three courses. The initial
pool included all of the studentsin both the graduate(Masters)and the non-
degree courses to be matchedby a balancedselection of the 64 studentsfrom
the undergraduatecourse. All of those in the non-degreecourse (11 students)
were interviewed.Three studentsin the graduatecourse were unavailableat
the end of the course for unforeseen circumstances:10 studentswere inter-
viewed. Two-thirdsof the final class (24 of 36 students)of the undergraduate
course were willing to be interviewed. A final selection was based on six
criteria:gender balance, age balance, ethnic/racialbalance, cross section of
degree schemes, cross section of interest in/seriousness toward the course
andbalancedrepresentationfrom the threeseminargroupsin the course.The
selection was made after consultationwith the course teachersand analysis
of registrydata.The final selection consisted of 19 students:11 studentsfrom
the volunteersin the final class and 8 students who did not attendthe final
class but agreedto be interviewedupon request.
Those takingpartin the studyreflecteda diverse social tapestryof people:
rangingin age from 19 to 71 years old and spanninga broadsection of occu-
pational experience as well as ethnic and national backgrounds.Their prior
education extended from school leaver to post-graduateand their previous
writingexperiencestretchedfrom almost nil to publishednovelists. For their
interview they were all asked to bring two compositions that they felt best
representedthe way they write and/orwhich representedthe work they wrote
on the course. The interviews were semi-structured,questions deliberately
being left open to permitinteractivediscussion and exchange on the various
262 GREGORY
LIGHT
areas of writing raised. The same schedule was used for all the students
althoughtherewere minoradaptationsto reflectvariationsin the courses.
The interview schedule was structuredto move from the concrete to
the general. Initial questionswere concernedwith their background,choice,
expectations and experience of the course. These led into a more specific
phase of questions concerningtheir actual writing activities with respect to
particularcompositions:genesis, content,detailsof the writingprocess,influ-
ences, fellow studentand teacherfeedback,personalresponse to the finished
text, differenceswith otherforms of writing.The finalphase focused more on
their general reflections/views/conceptionsof their experience of writing in
the highereducationcontext.It also includedquestionson the writingprocess
and the text, as above, but asked for more general views of creativewriting:
what if anythingis special or essential to creativewriting?;have their ideas
about creativewriting changedduringthe course?;what was the main thing
they learnedabout writingfrom the course?;what did they think their main
strengthsand weaknesses as a writer were?; what were they looking for in
teacheror class feedback?
All interviewswere tape-recorded,transcribedand analysedby the author.
Interviewlength rangedfrom lhr:20min to lhr:40min. The length and range
of the interviews posed significant challenges for analysis, especially the
identificationof the relevantdata (utterances)that are of particularinterest
to the question being investigated.A deep analysis of five fully transcribed
initial interviews was undertakento establish a preliminary 'map' of the
phenomenaexperiencedby the students.This 'map', while open to change,
subsequentlyproved invaluablein providing a workable method for simply
identifying particularphenomenadescribed by the diverse utterancesof the
differentinterviews. The ensuing analysis of the interviews was essentially
a phenomenographicanalysis, as describedby Marton(1988). The mapped-
out 'utterances'were processedin threephases:interpretingandcoding them;
categorisingthem (in terms of their particularmeaning in the interview) on
the basis of their similarities;and differentiatingthem (as categories) from
one anotherin termsof theirdifferences.
In analysingthe interviews,the unit of analysis was the student'sconcep-
tion of creative writing which not only embraces the way in which students
understandcreativewriting,butis also groundedin theirown active, concrete
practice:in the activityand contentof writing.In this sense, student'concep-
tions' are activity bound. Hounsell (1984) refers to such conceptions as
'action conceptions' and describes them as encompassing "both the ways
in which students define the activity and the ways in which they go about
essays and perceive essay content"(p. 74). Analysis of the interviewsmeant
checking and cross-checkingutterancesfrom differentareasof the transcripts
againstone anotherto ensureconsistency of meaning and categorisation.
Inevitablya degreeof erroris involvedin this kind of qualitativeanalysis:

subjective misinterpretationdue to personal concerns, interests and focus
with respect to the data, as well as errorsin logical analysis. Logical errors
of analysis have been reduced through a careful process of checking and
cross-checking the categories as they emerged against the data. Personal
concerns,interestsand focus, of course, play an importantrole in the nature
of the research situation being described, a situation which is determined
as much by the rich meanings inherent in both the theoretical perspec-
tives this researchertakes (critically) and the concrete researchsituationof
creativewriting courses sharedwith the respondents.Besides the important
issues of logical analysis, the validity of the concepts and categoriesestab-
lished depends partly on the researchersability to share and understand
the respondents'meanings as well as "partlyon the match with previous
researchfindings, and partly on the extent to which the categories provide
an accuratedescriptionof 'recognisablereality'" (Entwistle and Entwistle
1992, pp. 5-6).
The analysis yielded categories of descriptionsof students' conceptions
or materialunderstandingof creativewriting.These conceptions,it shouldbe
stressed,arenot consideredto be independentcognitive entities but,rather,to
be socially constitutedcategoriesof materialunderstanding,poised between
the private and public and groundedin the encounter of the student with
the specific academic situation. They are subject to change depending on
numerouscontextualissues (Light 1996).
Results
The principalresultsof the study presentedin this paper will concentrateon

the typology of distinctiveconceptionsor materialunderstandingsof creative
writing that emergedfrom the analysis of the interview data. In particularit
will focus on the structuralperspectiveof these conceptions and the nature
of the main featuredefining them. The study also disclosed both composi-
tional and situational perspectives of the conceptions. The compositional
perspectiveconcerneddetailed studentexperiencesof the range of activities
associatedwith the actualwritingprocess - from the genesis of a composition
to the completed text. The situationalperspectiveconcerned the impact on
student conceptionsof studentexperiences of contextual and social factors
characterisingthe highereducationcreativewritingsituation.2
Before proceedingto a descriptionof the structuraltypology of creative
writing conceptions, it is essential to frame the principal results presented
here in terms of a broaderfinding emerging from the study: a clear 'them-
atic convergence'in the students'assumptionsabout and perceptionsof the
264 GREGORY
LIGHT
nature of Creative Writing. Student accounts were remarkablyuniform in

viewing creativewritingas both qualitativelyunique and differentfrom other
forms of writing.These assumptionsmost often emergedin contrastto other
forms of writingin which they engaged such as essay or journalisticwriting.
In both sets of results presentedbelow, the meanings of the categories and
descriptionspresentedare illustratedthroughthe comments of the students
themselves.
Studentassumptions/perceptionsof creative writing
In all of the student's accounts, creative writing is associated with the

'personal',particularlypersonalor privateexperience.In this thereappearsto
be a consistencyof 'feeling', a consistencywhich assumeswhatBerlin (1987)
describesas a subjectivistor expressionistrhetoric,one where "thatwhich the
writeris trying to express ... is the productof a privateand personalvision"
(p. 74). Such a rhetoric"considerswritingto be an art,the originalexpression
of a uniquevision" (p. 148).
I'd like to be able to writeessays as such um andget thatsame emotional
satisfactionbut I'd have to have, I'd have to want to say something. I'd
have to have something to say (...) something personal to say about
whatever.(Amanda)
(Creative writing) ... it's more personal ... seems more personal ... I'm
a bit selfish and a bit more self indulgent ... you have more interestin
it. (Jay)
In this thereare thingsthatarepersonalexperiencesto me, so you know,
it would be layers of feeling thatyou don't do in an essay. (Vicky)
Essays have to include more reading ... comments about other people,
when this (creative writing) ... it's your own writing ... it's from you.
(Michael)
Relatedto this idea of creativewritingdrawingmore fully upon the personal,

most studentson all threecourses also perceivedcreativewritingas providing
them with more freedom. Once again, this was often in contrast to their
perceptions of discursive writing restrictingfreedom. It is a quality which
Bishop (1994) refers to as "themyth of free creativity".
(Creativewriting)is a much freersort of writing (thanessay writing) ...
something that stems from your own ideas, your own experience, what
you experience in life. (Sarah)
I've got a free hand with (creativewriting). I make it do what I want it
to do. I'm not, what's it, restricted... everybody has a certainlevel of
experiencethat you can make into something. (Delora)
I'm far moreemotionallyengaged with writingfiction (.. .) it feels more

exposed. (...) With the subject matter I feel less restricted with the
creativewriting.(Paul)
I can do what I want ... more freedom but also ... because it's just
a differentform. ... In essays you're picking up comments that other
people have made ... you've got to be very accuratewith quotes. (Colin
22)
(Creativewriting)has a higher ability to make people understandwhy
people act andfeel in a certainway ... because it's not restrainedby the
facts. (Austin)
It is definitelya freedom.That'sthe way I look on writing,it's an escape
(...) a coming to terms with, you know, nasty, horrible things (...) in
your life, in, in, in the way the world is. (Felix)
... one (creative writing) is kind of like mind freeing, freeing your
imagination,creatingempty spaces which then get filled up with some-
thing absolutelynew andyou don't know where the hell it's come from,
right. And the otherone (essay writing) is sort of shoving a hell of a lot
of noise in your head and wantingto scream.(Leila)
The general assumptionof writing,here, is that, in contrastto essay writing,

creative writing provides a writing opportunitywhich permits students to
tap into a much more private,personal and emotional reality for their ideas
and material.It is characterisedby freedom from the non-personal,external
demands of facts and other people's ideas, comments and forms. For the
most part it is concerned with original, creative, personal experiences and
feelings that can be discoveredby the self and which provide the basis for
their material.Even in those accounts that do not make a clear distinction
between creativeand discursivewriting, the emphasis is still subjectivist.In
such cases, discursivewritingis also viewed as very personal:
I can make an essay as personal as I like, if I have a particularand
personalresponseto the question. (Andrea)
I mean I thinkjournalismcan be creative;featurejournalismcertainly
uh involves a certainamountof creativity.I think short story writingis
just creativityon a differentlevel, or in a, a differentdimension.It's all
creativity.(Sonya)
The above utterancesillustratea generalconvergencethatwas foundin all the

student assumptions/perceptionsof creative writing, a convergencecutting
across the diversityof backgroundsand courses. It is, moreover,a conver-
gence that providesthe conceptualground on which studentconceptionsof
creativewritingrests.The issue here is not the validity of these assumptions
266 GREGORYLIGHT
but ratherthe 'radical' natureof its subjectivistepistemology coupled with

what appearsto be its general and widespreadacceptance.
Studentconceptionsof creative writing
While the epistemologicalconvergencedescribedabove was widely shared,it

does not describethe studentconceptionsthatemerged.It providesa founda-
tion upon which and from which two contrastingcategories of conceptions,
transcribingand composing, can be understood.Together,these categories
describe a typology of distinctivetypes of studentconception. Each concep-
tion is, moreover,described in terms of a defining feature of conception
that emerged from the analysis of the data: reader awareness. This section
presentsthe main featureand its relationshipto conception.
Reader awareness:The definingfeature
The central feature of conceptions of creative writing, that by which the

main two categoriesof conceptionare delineatedis describedhere as 'reader
awareness'. Reader awareness has two dimensions: the first concerns the
readerin what Bakhtin(1986) calls the "addressivity"of writing:that aspect
of being "directedto someone", an "addressee",who may vary from "an
immediateparticipant-locutorin an everydaydialogue (to) ... an indefinite,
unconcretizedother" (p. 95). This dimension distinguishes between two
qualitativelydifferent ways of regardingthe addressee/reader.The first is
a detached awareness in which the writer 'uses' (reproduces)the personal
meanings of his/her material with respect to the reader in the activity of
writing.The focus is on the material,on transcribingit.
I don't know how to do that, writing for a reader.So what I do is I play
games with myself and think that maybe if you do something which is
honest... it will carryto the reader.(Leila)
The student-writerhere regardsthe reader'sunderstandingof theirmaterialas

"detached"fromtheirown writingactivity.The second way of understanding
the addressee/readermay be describedas an integratedawareness. Here the
writer 'makes' (transforms)the personal meanings of his/her materialwith
respect to the readerin the activity of writing.The focus is on the writing,on
composing.
I'm awareof trying to make sense to otherpeople, yet at the same time
... I thinkI make the readerwork. (Carol)
Here, the student-writeris concerned to "integrate"the reader's under-

standingof their materialduring the activities of writing. Furtherexamples
OFCREATIVE
CONCEPTIONS WRITING 267
Table 1. Conceptions of creative writing (categories, types and
features)
Conception Defining feature

Categories Readerawareness
(Types) Addressivity Readership
Transcribing
Type I: Releasing Detached Dissenting
Type II: Documenting Detached Assenting
Composing
Type III:Narrating Integrated Assenting
Type IV: Critiquing Integrated Dissenting
of this core distinctionare provided in the richer contexts of the particular

conceptionsdescribedbelow: indeed it will be centralto them.
The second dimensionof reader awareness recognises that readersexist
in concrete,social situations,using specific culturalforms: they are partof a
readership.Williams (1977) writes of such forms thatthey are "thecommon
property... of writersand audiences or readers,before any communicative
composition can occur" (pp. 187-188). The distinction here is whether or
not (i) the student "assentsto" or (ii) "dissentsfrom" the prevailingforms
(discourse)embracedby his/herreadership.In the formerthe studentaccepts
the prevailinggenres and forms of the course (or market):
One thing the course has taught me is to be much more aware of the
marketyou're writingfor. (Sarah)
There were, however,a numberof instances in which the dissent from such
forms was regardedas importantto creativewriting:
I wouldn't say something for the sake of it. Even if it's socially
unaccepted,I'd still write it, if that is what is coming out. (Joel)
Again, furtherexamples of these dimensions are providedbelow. As shown

in Table 1, these two dimensions delineate the four main types of concep-
tion which emergedfromthe accountsof creativewritingstudents:releasing,
documenting,narratingand critiquing.3
268 GREGORY
LIGHT
Transcribingconceptions
TypeI: Releasing
This conception describes student-writerswho, while recognising readers
sharetheirlanguage,nevertheless,view their own writingas a fully personal,
private 'creation'. Creative writing is focused almost exclusively on the
material and often regarded as being therapeutic and for the writer. It
'works' if it is released and provides a kind of personal 'therapy' and or
self-knowledge.
But I mean I write for personal reasons, for me (...) to grapple with
the me, to try and clarify the me. I mean a lot of things happen and as
part of the confusion, you can't get it straightin your head, and that's
uncomfortable,so you try and grapplewith it, you try and straightenit
out and you try and externaliseit... I mean somebody might like my
writing, somebodymighthate it. (Joel)
In some senses it's (creativewriting) an exorcism, in other senses it's
just for money ... (it's) trying to express a sense of yourself, you in
relationto everythingelse, tryingto create your own history.I think it's
more relatingyourselfandtryingto find yourself in the world and trying
to find any meaningfor yourself, whetherthere's any actually,if there's
any purposeto your existing, questioningthis. (Scott)
I'm sure that most people who write, who have any interestin writing
cannothandlethe idea of sharing,sharingtheirideas. If they do it's very
superficial.(Scott)
Here the student-writer'dissents' from the prevailing readership 'forms'
and simply 'releases' his/her or materialin personal forms (e.g. 'streamof
consciousness'). Indeed,viewing writing any other way (transformingor re-
creatingit with respect to a reader)is often seen as a kind of betrayalof self
and artisticintegrity.Thereis no apparentconcern with deeperconventionsof
character,story,descriptionotherthan the personal grapplingwith the prob-
lems and clarificationof the material.The issue of the readerappreciatingthe
writingis entirelyincidental.Awarenessand concern for readeris 'detached'
from the writer'sexpressionof theirmaterialin the activity of writing.
TypeII: Documenting
In this conception the writeraccepts that he/she is writing for a readerbut,
again, does so primarilyat the level of their material. The writer wants to
capturean experience,a scene, an idea, and transcribeor documentit the way
he or she sees it or feels it. How the readerwill read it is incidental,hopeful,
a situation detached and over which they feel they have little control. The
writer'sconcern is mainly with surface conventions - spelling, punctuation,
OFCREATIVE
CONCEPTIONS WRITING 269
grammar- and 'works' if the material(experiences/ideasetc.) is interesting,

communicatedand/or meets the course requirements:i.e. primarilyat the
level of theirmaterial.Insofaras they acceptthe reader'srole, they also accept
readershipforms, althoughthe range here is often limited to very general
genre forms (fiction, poetry,drama)and those takenfrom course exercises.
(the most importantthing) was capturingthe experience,of actuallynot
losing that time ... just puttingit down andjust keeping it for myself,
hopefully as well I'm makinga poem which would say, perhaps,some-
thing to somebody else ... (Michael)
I know it (the play) and myself have our limitations and it's sort of
rubbishbecause it's shortandbecause it was done to orderif you like. I
mean here we're given an exercise so I decided to do this. (Neil)
... to be honest I'm never really aware of the structure,I tend not to
think about these things in, in terms of form ... I'm not trying to be
clever with the form. The form is a way of getting across the truth.(...
The main concern) is just trying to reach out and touch somebody and
just say, you know,hey, how aboutthis?
Interviewer:Towhom?
Well to myself firstof all, so thatI actuallythink,yes, that'strue,yes
that'swhat I wantedto say, and then should anybodyreadit. (Julie)
In an extended version of this type of conception, there is an attemptto

integratethe reader,but only as a more specific 'consumer' requiringmore
specified, often marketorientedforms. Generalforms of fiction, poetry and
drama are not sufficient: more specific (and 'reproducible') forms were
requiredfor 'carrying'the meaningof ones material.
I have to get an idea of somethingI want to write about ... it's always
something that I see or something that I've experienced. And then,
having got that, I then have to think about what I'm going to do with
it and this is wherethis course has been very good to me ... I then start
to think about the market ... (Sarah)
Frequently allied with this concern is an intellectual recognition of the

comprehensionrequirementsof the reader coupled with an inability (often
associatedwith conflictandfrustration)to integratethese requirementswithin
the activityof writing.
... therewas a sortof dual attitudetowardsum how much I, I supposeI
do tailorit to the audience.I mean I was thinkingaboutwantingit to be
comprehensibleand, and to express what I wanted to, but also ... there
was a sortof stubbornnessin saying well this is what I wantto writeand,
and you'll just have to understandthat,you'll have to bearit. (Martin)
270 GREGORYLIGHT
Composingconceptions
TypeIII: Narrating
Narratingconceptions are characterisedby the recognitionof a new way of
understandingwriting, integratingmaterialand readerwithin the practiceof
writing.
... writingisn't just somethingthathits you like a thunderbolt and you
suddenly get this inspirationand scribble something down ... it's an
activity that you can practise and get better at. It's a skill. (...) being
able to use a structure- to impose a structureon myself, on my ideas.
(Holly)
These new ways of understandingwriting describe a change from seeing
it as a matter of material, even inspiration("thunderbolt") that is simply
documented ("scribbleddown"), towards a concern "to impose a structure
on myself'. In the first instance this change is new and rather limited in
its practice.It does, nevertheless,accept prevailingreadershipforms and is
concernedto structurewith respectto them.
(I can) sort of see my work more objectively - without being biased
about it. (...) in the way that perhaps I would read someone else's work.
Justsortof unclutteredwithoutthe sortof - the personalconnectionwith
the work. (...) incorporating techniques whereby you impose a structure
on yourself. (Holly)
I make it do what I want it to do ... I think your overall experience
helps, everybodyhas a certainlevel of experiencethatyou can makeinto
something,but not everybodycan make that experienceinto something
thatsomebody else would want to read. (Delora)
This new sense of structuringmaterial is related to the student's ability to

begin integratingreaderand readershipforms. Significantly,it is not seen as
simply a way of conformingto more specific 'consumer'forms but ratheras
a way of becoming "moreobjective"about one's work, more able to relate
one's work to potentialreaders.
I guess I'm aware of trying to make sense to other people, yet at the
same time, I don't - I think I make the reader work ... I'm aware of
not making it too easy for people, you know just sort of withholding
information.I mean I am quite fond of ambiguity.(Carol)
I think there are techniques that you can deploy ... things you should
do and shouldn't do (...) consistency of tone and, deciding who's point
of view this story going to be told from, and writing in such a way that
the reader's gonna be engaged (...) It's having a story to tell and being
confident somebody else wants to hear it. (...) I kind of can sense now
what it is that would make somebody smile, what it is that would make
somebodythink that's a bit over the top, or what it is that would make
somebodycringe. (Paul)
Thereis often a sense of confidenceand facility in the accountshere thatare

associatedwith a more internalisedawarenessof the readerand an ability to
speakto themwithin the activityof writing.
TypeVI: Critiquing
Critiquingconceptionsreveala concernto integratethe readerandreadership
forms within the activity of writing,but there is also evidence of a personal
dissent from and critiqueof certainaspects of that integration.Such critical
dissent may consist in a dissenting critique of the practice itself and/or it
might consist of a dissentingcritiqueof aspectsof thatpracticeover a variety
of discourseissues and forms.
... you ought to have something to say if you're going to write (...)
some new insight, some comment on human experience some -(...)
Maybe somethingpersonal,maybe somethingglobal but somethingthat
is worthsaying thatyou wantto communicateto somebodyelse thathas
a sortof worthto it. (.. .) um more awareI supposeof the importanceof
originalityactually.Because thatbecomes quite a crucialissue when you
are, really are writing somethingthat you think other people are going
to read.Um, you know, am I saying anythingthat they haven't already
heard a million times before? (...) Or am I, you know, am I saying it in
such a way that they are going to see somethingdifferentabout it even
if they have heardit. (Jill)
I think I'm learning to differentiatebetween what I think I'm writing
and what I've written, because ... just by hearing the responses,just
realisingthatI thoughtI was saying somethingbut it wasn'tbeing heard
andthenI musthave to, uh, thinkagain aboutwhatI'm tryingto say and,
and the way I'm saying it to get it heard more clearly. (...) You have to
be flexible and fluid to, to the possibilities that come up. And, and the
truth,because sometimesyou can catch yourself lying I think.(...) Um,
becausesomething'seasy to say. Because you've got it pegged. And then
you get a little niggle, niggling feeling in the back of your mind:but is
that what I mean, is that really, is that really it, or is that really true?
(Monica)
If both accounts are concernedwith integratingthe readerin their writing,

they also suggest a critical contour to this conception of writing that is
272 GREGORY
LIGHT
based in a personal dissent from and challenge to readershipissues. Jill,

for example, is deeply concerned that writing be about something that is
worth saying, a "new insight, some comment on human experience".This
is disclosed in her emphasis on "the importanceof originality".The point
is to integratethe reader "in such a way that they are going to see some-
thing differentabout it even if they have heardit". SimilarlyMonica notes a
'personal'impetus to critique:you may feel that "you've got it pegged" but
thereis dissent,"alittle niggle"which demandsa morecriticalexaminationof
what you have written:"is thatreally true".The concern,then, is not simply
that the readerhas 'heard' what they are saying, but that the way in which
they write uniquely challenges the way that the readerhas 'heard' it. And,
significantly,it is this dissent from and challenge to other forms or ways in
which the readermay have "heardit" which is, as Jill says, the "crucialissue
when you are, really are writing something that you think other people are
going to read."
Discussion
There are two overarchingthemes that emerge from the above results. The
firstconcernsthe similaritiesthatcan be observedbetween the distinctionsin
creative writing conceptions described here and the distinctions in concep-
tions of essay writing in more traditionaldisciplines in higher education.
The two main categoriesof transcribingand composing conceptions closely
reflectthe reproducing(meaning-using)and transforming(meaning-making)
categoriesdescribedin researchon discursivewritingin general(Bereiterand
Scardamalia1987) and in phenomenographicresearch elucidating concep-
tions of essay writingin particular.Indeed thereis a strongresemblancewith
contrastingcategories described in studies of discursive writing (Hounsell
1984, 1997; Campbell et al. 1998). These similarities support the general
research results of student experiences in higher education: that students
conceptualise their study and writing activities in distinct and different
ways, ways which teachers may not be aware of but which have important
pedagogicalimplications.
The second key theme to emergefrom this study andthe mainfocus of this
discussion concerns the differenceswhich emerged in this researchbetween
the natureof the conceptions of essay writing and those of creative writing.
While there are importantparallels with these, there is also a fine variance
worthexploringfurther.This may be elucidatedmore fully with a morefinely
detailedcomparisonof conceptionsof essay writing and creativewriting.
In his study of essay writing conceptions, Hounsell (1984b) describes
three components of conception as data, organisation and interpretation.
In the first instance, the public data component ("the raw material or the
bedrock of essays" (p. 110) provided by others, made public by authors,
teachersetc) may be contrastedwith the natureof the 'data' or materialthat
creativewriting studentssaid they drew upon. They primarilyregardedthis
material,drawnfrom their experiences,as personal(often private)in nature.
The secondvariationwith essay conceptionsis with Hounsell's interpretation
component("themeaningor meaningsgiven to essay materialby the student"
(p. 110)). This difference centres on what might be called the 'directionof
integration'.In contrastto the creativewriting concern to integrate(or not)
the reader with the personal material,essay writing indicates a concern to
integrate(or not) personal "meaningor meanings"with public materialand
forms.The interpretationcomponentmay almostbe describedas a 'personal-
isation' of thatpublic materialor problemswith respect to the student'sown
personal ideas and/or opinions: on the one hand in the "non-interpretative"
('detached')sense of merely 'acknowledging'thatthere shouldbe a personal
stance alongside the public materialand on the other,in the "interpretative"
sense in which the personal stance is 'integrated'with the public material.
While not explicitly stated,thereis what might be called an implicitpersonal
awareness(an awarenessof a relationshipof personalmeaningsto the public
material)that, like reader awareness, may be describedas being 'detached'
or 'integrated'.
However,despite the convergencein the study of studentassumptionsof
a 'subjectivistepistemology' which is attributedto the practice of creative
writingas opposedto thatof essay writing,the resultsdo not supportthe view
thatcreativewritingis a fundamentallydifferentform of writingvis-h-vis the
writing self, as suggested by the work of Britton (1970) and Emig (1971).
The presentfindingssuggest a differentepistemologicaldeparturepoint and,
as a result, categories of understandingwith a differentand an illuminating
epistemologicalslant. There is no supportin the findingsfor suggesting that
these differentmodes of writingareanythingotherthandifferencesof degree.
Indeed, there is an interesting similarity suggested between the releasing
conceptionof creativewritingdescribedabove and the viewpointconception
of Psychology essay writing described by Hounsell (1997). Significantly,
with the viewpointconception, he notes, "the general impression is one of
a lack of concernwith this (publicdata) sub-component"(p. 113).
This study of creative writing conceptions is most illuminating in its
analysis of the personalnatureof writing. It highlights the student-writeras
personal producer/consumerof meaning in terms of the other, as opposed
to the studentas public consumer/producerof meaning in terms of the self.
While in both cases, the discussion is of the same phenomena (differen-
tiated by the differentkind of disciplinarywriting involved), the focus on
274 GREGORY
LIGHT
theirvariancehere emphasises more clearly the dialogical natureof meaning

and studentunderstanding.It makes clearerthe 'multi-directional'natureof
studentconceptionsof writing in which meaning and understandingmay be
describedin terms of the natureof the particulardiscipline: in particularthe
directionalnature of the relationshipbetween the self and a public other.
In this respect, understandingand meaning (depending on the natureof the
specific discipline)might be describedas being on a 'directionalcontinuum'.
Hounsell(1984), for example, notes importantdistinctionsbetween the essay
writingconceptionsof Historyand Psychology students.
... the History studenthas comparativelygreaterfreedom both to artic-
ulate an argumentwhich representshis or her own interpretationof an
historical problem and to focus the essay discussion aroundevidence
relevantto this argument.(pp. 314-315)
Significantly,this distinction is expressed in terms associated with creative

writing: of 'freedom' and scope for more personal interpretation.History
students' conceptions reflect a greaterdegree of freedom both with respect
to the data (material)that they are able to bring to their essay writing and
with respectto the forms theirparticularinterpretationscan take.
... in attemptingto groundhis or her essay firmlyin the literatureof the
discipline the Psychology studentcannotmake free play with empirical
findings but must anchorthe discussion in whateverconceptualframe-
work gave rise to those findings. ... By contrast,the data which form
the raw materialfor the History student's essay do not have the same
conceptualanchorage.(Hounsell 1984, p. 315)
On the personal-publiccontinuum,History conceptions fall closer to that of

creativewritingconceptionsthando those of psychology conceptions.
The subtledistinctionsin the 'personal-public'balancethatappearto exist
between the ways in which students understandwriting in particulardisci-
plines may also contributeto ourunderstandingof the documenteddifficulties
studentsoften have in 'courseswitching' between disciplines (Lea and Street
1998). In this respect, the results of this study lend supportto the 'academic
literacies' model of student writing which Lea and Street have recently
described.This model "views student writing and learning as issues at the
level of epistemologyandidentitiesratherthanskill or socialisation"(Lea and
Street 1998, p. 159). The relationshipof the student'spersonal sense of iden-
tity to the public readership(academicliteracy)associatedwith the discipline
becomes a significant component of how s/he may understandthe practice
of writing within it. In some disciplines the relationship may lend itself
more easily to the developmentof transforming/composingconceptions. In
others it may work against such a development.In this respect,the findings

presentedin this paper suggest, along with the 'academic literacies' model,
"that one explanation for problems in student writing might be the gaps
between academic staff expectationsand student interpretationsof what is
involved in studentwriting"(p. 159). Tutorrecognitionand understandingof
the possibility of such personal-publicdistinctionswithin differentliteracies
may help in dealingwith andovercomingcriticalproblemsin studentwriting.
It also suggests a potentialline of furtherresearchand enquiry.
Notes
1. The research presented here is part of a larger research project mapping out student
conceptions of creative writing. That research looked at three interlinkedperspectives
of conceptions:compositional,structuraland situational(Light 1995a).
2. A full descriptionand discussion all three aspects of conception can be found in Light
(1995a).
3. A fuller analysis of 'conception' includes two qualifying features- cohesion and range.
The first is concerned with the natureof the writing 'work' - techniques,conventions
structures- the student utilises in writing. The second is concerned with the natureof
personalor public writingforms the studenttakes in theirwriting.They are not necessary
for the presentdiscussion.For a full analysis of them see Light (1995a).
References
Bakhtin,M. (1986). Speech Genresand OtherLate Essays. Austin:Universityof TexasPress.

Beaty, L., Gibbs, G. and Morgan,A. (1997). 'Learningorientationsand study contracts',in
Marton,F., Hounsell D. and EntwistleN. (eds.), The Experienceof Learning.Edinburgh:
Scottish Academic Press.
Bereiter,C. and Scardamalia,M. (1987). The Psychology of WrittenComposition.London:
LawrenceErlbaumAssociates Publishers.
Berlin,J. (1987). Rhetoricand Reality: WritingInstructionin AmericanColleges, 1900-1985.
Carbondale:SouthernIllinois UniversityPress.
Biggs, J.B. and Collis, K. (1982). Evaluatingthe Qualityof Learning: The SOLOTaxonomy.
New York:Academic Press.
Bishop, W. (1990). Released into Language: Optionsfor TeachingCreativeWriting.Urbana,
Illinois: NationalCouncil of Teacher'sof English (NCTE).
Bradbury,M. (1992). 'The bridgeablegap: Bringingtogetherthe creativewriterandthe critical
theoristin an authorlessworld', in The TimesLiterarySupplement,January,pp. 7-9.
Britton,J. (1970). Languageand Learning.London:Penguin Books.
CampbellJ., Smith,D. and Brooker,R. (1998). 'Fromconceptionto performance:How under-
graduatestudentsconceptualiseand constructessays', Higher Education36, 449-489.
Dahlgren, L. (1997). 'Learningconceptions and outcomes" in Marton, F., Hounsell D. and
EntwistleN. (eds.), The Experienceof Learning,rev. edn. Edinburgh:Scottish Academic
Press.
276 GREGORY
LIGHT
Emig, J. (1971). The ComposingProcesses of TwelfthGraders. Urbana, Illinois: National

Council of Teachersof English.
Entwistle,N. (1987). UnderstandingClassroomLearning. London:Hodderand Stoughton.
Entwistle, N. and Entwistle,A. (1992). 'Experiencesof understandingin revising for degree
examinations',Learningand Instruction2(1), 1-22.
Entwistle, N. and Entwistle, A. (1997). 'Revision and the experience of understanding',in
Marton,F, Hounsell D. and EntwistleN. (eds.), The Experienceof Learning.Edinburgh:
Scottish Academic Press.
Freeman, J. (1987). 'Creativewriting in a university English course', in VAAInformation
Pack: Teachingand Practising VerbalArts in Education and the Community.The Verbal
Arts Association.
Gladwin,S. (1987). 'Introducinga writingcourse at a Polytechnic', in VAAInformationPack:
Teachingand Practising VerbalArts in Education and the Community.The VerbalArts
Association.
Hounsell, D. (1984). StudentConceptionsof Essay Writing.PhD. Thesis, Lancaster:Lancaster
University.
Hounsell, D. (1987). 'Essay writing and the quality of feedback', in Richardson, T.E.,
Eysenck, M.W. and PiperD.W. (eds.), StudentLearning.Milton Keynes: Open University
Press.
Hounsell, D. (1997). 'Contrastingconceptions of essay writing', in Marton, F., Hounsell
D. and Entwistle N. (eds.), The Experience of Learning, rev. edn. Edinburgh:Scottish
Academic Press.
Lea, M. and Street, B. (1998). 'Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies
approach',Studies in Higher Education23(2) 157-172.
Light, G. (1992). 'Creativewritingin higher education', Writersin Education 1, 15-17.
Light,G. (1995a). TheLiteratureof the Unpublished:StudentConceptionsof CreativeWriting
in Higher Education. PhD Thesis, London: The Institute of Eiducation,University of
London.
Light, G. (1995b). 'Avoidingthe issue: Student perceptions of creative writing', Writersin
Education5, 5-9.
Light, G. (1996). 'The limits of literature:Creative writing in the universityclassroom: Two
case studies', Writersin Education9, 13-18.
Lybeck, L. and Marton,M. (1988). 'The phenomenographyof the "mole concept"in chem-
istry', in Ramsden P. (ed.), Improving Learning: New Perspectives. London: Kogan
Page.
Marton,F. (1988). 'Phenomenography:A researchapproachto investigatingdifferentunder-
standings of reality', in Sherman and Webb (eds.), Qualitative Research in Education:
Focus and Methods.London:The FalmerPress,.
Marton, F. and Saljo, R. (1997). 'Approachesto learning', in Marton, F., Hounsell D. and
Entwistle N. (eds.), TheExperienceof Learning, rev. edn. Edinburgh:Scottish Academic
Press.
Marton, F., Dall'Alba, G. and Beaty, E. (1993). 'Conceptions of learning', International
Journal of EducationalResearch 19(3), 265-299.
Ramsden,P. (1992). Learningto Teachin Higher Education. London:Routledge.
Richardson, T.E. (1995). 'Mature students in higher education II: An investigation of
approachesto studyingandacademicperformance',Studiesin Higher Education20, 5-17.
Saljo, R. (1979). 'Learningin the learner'sperspective.I. Some common-sense conceptions',
ReportsFrom The Departmentof Education,Vol. 76. Universityof Gothenburg.
Williams, R. (1977). Marxismand Literature.Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress.

Light 2002 Creative Writing in Higher Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Light 2002 Creative Writing in Higher Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

From the Personal to the Public: Conceptions of Creative Writing in Higher Education

Author(s): Gregory Light

From the personal to the public: Conceptions of creative writing

Abstract. Much qualitativeresearchon studentlearningin higher educationhas focused on a

Keywords: academicliteracy,conceptions of learning,conceptions of writing,creative writ-

Much recentresearchon the experienceof studentlearningin highereduca-

cation and explorationof learning in terms of student 'conceptions' of an

Hounsell (1987), moreover,identifiedthree sub-component"core elements"

of 'underlyingconceptualisations'(p. 466) at every stage of the writing

The currentstudy was designed to take a similar approachto investigating

lectual and academicresistanceto its move into universitieshas traditionally

The studydrawson the analysis of interviewaccountsof 40 CreativeWriting

... the relationshipof the particularwriting course to the activity of

Inevitablya degreeof erroris involvedin this kind of qualitativeanalysis:

The principalresultsof the study presentedin this paper will concentrateon

nature of Creative Writing. Student accounts were remarkablyuniform in

Studentassumptions/perceptionsof creative writing

In all of the student's accounts, creative writing is associated with the

Relatedto this idea of creativewritingdrawingmore fully upon the personal,

I'm far moreemotionallyengaged with writingfiction (.. .) it feels more

The general assumptionof writing,here, is that, in contrastto essay writing,

The above utterancesillustratea generalconvergencethatwas foundin all the

but ratherthe 'radical' natureof its subjectivistepistemology coupled with

Studentconceptionsof creative writing

While the epistemologicalconvergencedescribedabove was widely shared,it

Reader awareness:The definingfeature

The central feature of conceptions of creative writing, that by which the

The student-writerhere regardsthe reader'sunderstandingof theirmaterialas

Here, the student-writeris concerned to "integrate"the reader's under-

Conception Defining feature

of this core distinctionare provided in the richer contexts of the particular

Again, furtherexamples of these dimensions are providedbelow. As shown

grammar- and 'works' if the material(experiences/ideasetc.) is interesting,

In an extended version of this type of conception, there is an attemptto

Frequently allied with this concern is an intellectual recognition of the

This new sense of structuringmaterial is related to the student's ability to

Thereis often a sense of confidenceand facility in the accountshere thatare

If both accounts are concernedwith integratingthe readerin their writing,

based in a personal dissent from and challenge to readershipissues. Jill,

theirvariancehere emphasises more clearly the dialogical natureof meaning

Significantly,this distinction is expressed in terms associated with creative

On the personal-publiccontinuum,History conceptions fall closer to that of

others it may work against such a development.In this respect,the findings

Bakhtin,M. (1986). Speech Genresand OtherLate Essays. Austin:Universityof TexasPress.

Emig, J. (1971). The ComposingProcesses of TwelfthGraders. Urbana, Illinois: National

You might also like