Product vs Process Approach to Teaching Legal Writing

Product vs. Process Approach to Teaching Legal Writing Conference on the Pedagogy of Legal Writing for Academics in Africa March 14 -17, 2007 Associate Dean and Professor of Law Nancy Soonpaa Texas Tech University School of Law

Introduction l l What do you write? How do you write it?

What are product and process approaches to teaching writing? l l The product approach is a traditional approach to teaching writing in which students typically are provided a model and encouraged to mimic it in order to produce a similar product. The process approach focuses more on the process of getting to the product, by using techniques such as brainstorming, exploring ideas, peer editing, and rewriting.

Historical developments in writing instruction: moving from product to process l l l The mid-1960’s saw new developments in writing instruction, which had typically been a formalistic, product-oriented model. The new stage-model theory set out the linear process that is now used in many writing courses: pre-writing rewriting. As one early researcher said, by examining and emphasizing process rather than product, teachers could shift focus to creation from recognition, to method from content, to thought from meaninglessness. About 20 years later, legal writing programs began to move from the product to process approach as well.

A comparison of product and process approaches l Product • • Model text to be imitated Emphasis on organization of ideas One draft Emphasis on end product Teacher as audience Teacher as authority Importance of teachercorrected papers l Process • • Model text as resource for comparison Emphasis on ideas and idea development Multiple drafts Emphasis on process Various audiences according to type of writing Peer feedback as valuable tool Importance of conferencing and interactive feedback

More information about the writing process l l The basic process scheme is prewriting drafting revising. (Note that there are models that add stages, but all include these three stages. )

More information about the writing process l The basic process scheme is prewriting drafting revising. • Prewriting includes activities such as brainstorming ideas, finding and recalling knowledge, discussing the writing project, and mapping out ideas.

More information about the writing process l The basic process scheme is prewriting drafting revising. • Prewriting includes activities such as brainstorming ideas, finding and recalling knowledge, discussing the writing project, and mapping out ideas. • Drafting includes activities such as organizing ideas, describing and explaining, and writing.

More information about the writing process l The basic process scheme is prewriting drafting revising. • Prewriting includes activities such as brainstorming • • ideas, finding and recalling knowledge, discussing the writing project, and mapping out ideas. Drafting includes activities such as organizing ideas, describing and explaining, and writing. Revising includes activities such as rearranging, adding, and deleting content; seeking audience feedback; and editing and proofreading.

Exercise comparing product vs. process approach l You assign your students to write a client letter, a letter informing a client of the results of legal research and analysis of the client’s legal issue. Your students have already written an objective memorandum of law on the same legal issue.

Example of product vs. process approach, cont’d l l How would you teach the client letter using a product approach? How would you teach the client letter using a process approach?

What are the pros and cons of each model? l Product model • Pros: • Cons: • • Easy to use with large classes Easier to grade because emphasis is on form Useful approach when form is important Does not teach how to write independently Does not teach how to think Does not make writing a manageable and intentional activity Limits creativity l Process model • Pros: • Cons: • • Helps novice writers develop skills to write on their own Encourages a thoughtful approach to writing Helps develop thinking skills and learning strategies Helps writers to own their writing process Can take more time to teach and to comment Need to be sure that writer does not make process explicit in writing itself Can make classroom more challenging for the teacher

Additional pedagogical benefits of the process approach l l Self-directed or self-regulated learning Adult learners

Additional pedagogical benefits of the process approach l Self-directed or self-regulated learning • Emphasizes the individual learner’s development of the ability to assess and manage his own learning through the use of strategies and a feeling of self-efficacy. l Adult learners

Additional pedagogical benefits of the process approach l l Self-directed or self-regulated learning • Emphasizes the individual learner’s development of the ability to assess and manage his own learning through the use of strategies and a feeling of selfefficacy. Adult learners • Recognizes that adult learners are autonomous and self-directed, are active learners, and need motivation and reinforcement to retain new knowledge and transfer that knowledge to other situations.

The benefits of using aspects of both models l l While the process approach has many benefits, legal writing is a formalized and convention-laden form of writing. The process approach was born in an era of change in which conventions were challenged and reliance on form and conventions, questioned. Using aspects of both models may be the most effective approach in teaching legal writing. How would you or how do you incorporate aspects of both in your own classes?

Questions or comments?

Bibliography l l l l Patricia Bizzell, Academic Discourse and Critical Consciousness 7682 (1992). Patricia Bizzell, Composing Process: An Overview, in The Teaching of Writing 71 (Anthony Petrosky & David Bartholomae eds. , 1986). James Britton et al. , The Development of Writing Abilities (11 -18) 2232 (1975). Robert J. Connors & Cheryl Glenn, The St. Martin's Guide to Teaching Writing 101 (1995). Dartmouth Writing Program, Teaching the Writing Process, www. dartmouth. edu/~writing/materials/faculty/pedagogies/process. sht ml (last visited March 3, 2007). Jo. Anne Durako et al. , From Product to Process: Evolution of a Legal Writing Program, 58 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 719 (Spring 1997). Janet Emig, Writing as a Mode of Learning, 28 C. Composition and Comm. 122 (1977). Linda Flower & John R. Hayes, A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing, 32 C. Composition and Comm. 365 (1981).

Bibliography, cont’d l l l l Linda S. Flower and John R. Hayes, Problem-Solving Strategies and the Writing Process, 39 C. English 449 (1977). Maxine Hairston, The Winds of Change: Thomas Kuhn and the Teaching of Writing, 33 C. Composition and Comm. 76 (1982). A Journey from Process to Product in Writing, http: //cd 1. emb. hkedcity. net/cd/EN/Content_3702/processwriting. htm (last visited March 3, 2007). Barry M. Kroll, Developmental Perspectives and the Teaching of Composition, 41 C. English 741 (1980). Andrea Lunsford, Cognitive Development and the Basic Writer, 41 C. English 38 (1979). Sondra Perl, Understanding Composing, 31 C. Composition and Comm. 363 (1980). Teresa Godwin Phelps, The New Legal Rhetoric, 40 Sw. L. J. 1089 (1986). J. Christopher Rideout & Jill J. Ramsfield, Legal Writing: A Revised View, 69 Wash. L. Rev. 35 (1994).

Bibliography, cont’d l l l l D. Gordon Rohman, Pre-Writing: The Stage of Discovery in the Writing Process, 16 C. Composition and Comm. 106 (1965). Nancy L. Sommers, The Need for Theory in Composition Research, 30 C. Composition and Comm. 46 (1979). Graham Stanley, Approaches to Process Writing, www. teachingenglish. net/think/write/process_write. shtml (last visited March 3, 2007). Vanessa Steele, Product and Process Writing: A Comparison, www. teaching-english. net/think/write/approaches. shtml (last visited March 3, 2007). Ralph F. Voss, Janet Emig's The Composing Processes of Twelfth Graders: A Reassessment, 34 C. Composition and Comm. 278 (1983). Stephen P. Witte, Pre-Text and Composing, 38 C. Composition and Comm. 397 (1987). Writing—Process vs. Product, http: //people. uncw. edu/sherrilld/EDN 355/process_product. htm (last visited March 3, 2007).