Emig Reflection

Janet Emig's Non-Magical Thinking

I find it interesting that all three of our theoretical authors so far (Emig, Britton, and Moffett) have tried to explain writing developmentally or progressively and all three approach it so differently even though they seem to be basically in agreement.

Emig's statement that "to believe that children learn because teachers teach. . . is to engage in magical thinking" is a little scary but also relieving in a way. It is scary because we would all like to believe that our teaching causes students to learn, and it feels like I am a failure as a teacher if I don't cause my students to learn. It is also relieving because it reminds us that even if we do a terrible job of teaching, it will not automatically cause students to fail at writing for the rest of their lives.

Although I don't see myself teaching students this young, I was fascinated by the way Emig described the development of written language in young children, from gestures to objects representing other things in play to actual written language. The section on the importance of fantasy play has made me feel more strongly about encouraging my own children (when the time comes) to play and use their imaginations freely.

I also am increasingly understanding the importance of my students seeing me as a writer. I especially realize that I need to write about music if I am going to ask my students to do so. I plan to start that this summer.

Assessing growth in writing completely makes sense to me, but the idea is very intimidating. I would like to look into the references Emig provides on this subject.