Comparing my peers’ and their faculty interviewees’ thoughts on good writing both made it easier and more difficult for me to define the concept. They were getting at similar ideas, but often had different opinions on what true good writing entails.
In terms of rubrics, there was dissention and mixed feelings. History teacher Brian McKay claimed it’s easier for the writer and the grader when “rubrics make it clear… what the expectations are.” However, he conceded that when presented with a rubric, writers don’t tend to step outside their comfort zone. Chemistry teacher Aimee Selby believed rubrics are “helpful for scientific writing which is not necessarily intuitive”, although she’s unsure of their use in creative writing because she doesn’t
…show more content…
According to McKay, if one was writing for a specific purpose, then the audience should determine if it is good or not because the main goal is to “appease the audience.” But, he added, “if [the writer is] writing for the sake of writing, the writer tends to determine [its] quality.” DeCiero spoke of writing as “an art form”, and emphasized its quality as a tool of expression important to the writer. However, she also saw how good writing could be decided by how the audience “receive[s] the author’s purpose and if [the writing] changes the way [the reader] looks at something.” At first, I believed the final product had to satisfy the writer’s goals to be classified as good writing, but now I realize a good writing process can help with self-discovery and expressing oneself without needing to achieve the intended result or even having a goal.
McKay, much like fellow history teacher, Amelia Braun, and Selby, emphasized that good writing should “accomplish the activity presented to you… [and have the] ability to achieve your goal in writing through a means of explanation and through a means of clear focus.” This is particularly relevant to my definition of good writing as a noun, as it was initially my only criteria to be classified as a strong piece of