In her article, “Writing as a Mode of Learning” author Janet Emig argues that the writing process helps “higher cognitive functions develop most fully only with the support system of verbal language” (Emig 122).  This article seems to be in direct opposition to our earlier readings by the ancient Greeks where it was argued that writing, a  new technology,  makes us lazy and stupid.  In those writings it was argued that only through the use of verbal reasoning could the highest level of cognitive ability be reached.

In this article Emig aruegs in favor of writing as a means of developing student learning for several reasons.  Writing allows for students to set their own pace and allows them to develop at an individual speed.  No two students are alike. The Greek model only allowed for students to follow along with the pacing of the instructor.   Writing also allows for immediate and almost constant feedback.  In the aural tradition feedback was not as constant or helpful to the learning process.  One of her most important points was that writing is an evidence trail of where the student has been  in the learning process so that progress or lackthereof can be seen and feedback can be more accurate.  In an oral tradition there is no trail of evidence without starting the whole resoning process over again.  I do find it to be quite ironic that the way we learn great Greek oral rhetoric is through the written versions of their orations.  Her last point that “writing is active, engaged, personal,” is one that rang the loudest for me.  Learning that isn;t tailored to the student is, to put it plainly, boring.  Writing is a way for the student to engage with the learning process and allows the student to invest personally in their learning.  With most general education courses the student isn’t usually interested in the subject.  Writing is a way to make the student interested in an otherwise uninteresting learning process.

On another note, Emig makes some very important and useful points about teaching.  Her statement that “A silent classroom or one filled with only the teachers voice is anathema to learning” (Emig 123).  I can testify from my own experience how true this is.  I have had classes, especially in college where the Instructor monopolized all conversations in the class or they taught by lecture alone.  Unless the student is a purely aural learner this sort of teaching doesn’t work.  I had one class where the instructor lectured on random topics not necessarily in the book or on our tests.  Listening to him lecture was misleading because the multiple choice tests that we took were straight from the text.