Re: freewriting

Becky Rickly (becky.rickly@UMICH.EDU)
Wed, 24 Jul 1996 16:41:08 -0400

>you deftly describe the distinction i was going for in the last phrase i
>quote here, "... and this practical wisdom can then INFORM practice."
>(emphasis mine). i wish to warn against the possibility of our stories
>*becoming* practice.

Again, I agree, but I suppose I'm not sure where these boundaries begin or
end....can't an informed practice become a prescriptive one? I guess I'm
not so sure that I'm against our stories (esp. in bulk, and not just one or
two) becoming practice.

Let me bring in flower and hayes again....seems to me that Flower described
the protocol analysis process like charting the progress made by porpoises
as they surface and dive.....the protocols give us an indication of what's
going on in the writer's head as she composes. What we're talking about
sounds more like Jaques Couseau's version of Flower's study: Helicopters
monitor progress from the sky, others watch from their perspective on the
water, and still others dive WITH the porpoises to watch them interact with
their environment, with each other, and with the divers. We're still not
in the porpoises' heads, but we have a much better idea of what they're
doing, and we might even guess as to why.

In my experience, anyway, teachers do base their practice on what they've
seen/heard/learned. So, in essence, our stories DO become practice. Good
teachers are constantly re-examining this practice, but nonetheless, we
generalize about what worked/didn't work before and act accordingly. How
is this any different?

--Becky, who's trying, ala hugh burns, to remember her porpoise....