Writing needs more recognition<\/p>\n
By A. Chaedar Alwasilah<\/p>\n
BANDUNG (JP): The language skill often reported as most wanted
\nby our students from elementary to graduate school is writing.
\nCompared to other skills -- listening, speaking and reading --
\nwriting is perceived as the most difficult to acquire for some
\nreason. Naturally, writing is acquired later than speaking. A
\nnewborn baby cries not writes, suggesting that while speaking is
\npractically a skill possessed by all, writing is possessed by a
\nfew.<\/p>\n
Anthropologists would agree that tribes exist today which do
\nnot recognize writing, yet it would be a big mistake to say they
\ndo not have culture. It is indisputable that writing is a modern
\nphenomenon through which culture is passed on from one generation
\nto another. Writing, no matter how simple it is, represents
\nculture and civilization. Further, in academic circles, writing
\nis an absolute necessity.<\/p>\n
Let us consider bibliographies from Indonesian university
\nstudent papers, theses or dissertations. How many Indonesian
\nreferences are listed? How many college lecturers are active in
\nwriting? Very few, I guess! Hypothetically speaking, college
\nfaculties are generally staffed by lecturers without adequate
\ncompetence in writing. Most of them are just consumers rather
\nthan producers of civilization's commodities; thus they are less
\ncompetitive in terms of publications. It is estimated that in the
\nlast five years Indonesia has published around 6,000 titles. This
\nfigure is obviously much lower than Malaysia with 8,000,
\nSingapore with 12,000 and Japan with 60,000 new textbooks.<\/p>\n
A longitudinal study of writing process involving 29 graduate
\nstudents revealed that 62.1 percent of the respondents believe
\nthat Indonesian education -- from elementary to college -- has
\nfailed to provide them with writing skills. Only 24.1 percent and
\n17.2 percent believed their education had provided them with
\nreading skills and critical thinking skills respectively.
\nRegarding college writing, the respondents identified four major
\nweaknesses as depicted in Table 1.<\/p>\n
Table 1: Perceived weaknesses of college writing (percentage
\nof respondents)<\/p>\n
1. Students get no feedback from instructors 68.9<\/p>\n
2. Students are taught more theory than practice 55.2<\/p>\n
3. Students do not realize the importance of writing 37.9<\/p>\n
4. Instructors are not competent in teaching writing 34.4<\/p>\n
As Table 1 shows, feedback in the form of corrections and
\ncomments by instructors on students' writing is virtually
\nneglected. Writing is in fact written speech that requires
\nfeedback from the audience. Without such feedback students are
\nnot motivated to write and rewrite, very much like talking to
\ninanimate objects. Students find comments such as "Aha, you find
\nthe way out", "I enjoy reading this part", "Put it in passive
\nvoice", or "You should be more specific here" encouraging and
\nrewarding.<\/p>\n
Likewise, marking particular aspects such as mechanics,
\ngrammar, vocabulary, rhetoric and content is helpful for
\nrevising. Students are led to rectify specific errors in their
\nwriting. Writing is an exacting endeavor that involves many
\naspects both linguistically as well as nonlinguistically.
\nMeanwhile, writing instructors are often blamed for committing
\nthe error of "rubber stamping" -- namely giving too general
\ncomments such as "That's good" or "Rewrite".<\/p>\n
As is always the case, there is a dichotomy between theory and
\npractice. Writing instructors prefer one to the other, the ideal
\nbeing to strike a balance between the two. The language
\ncurriculum traditionally comprises listening, speaking, reading
\nand writing. While writing is the most difficult skill to
\nacquire, instructors unfortunately tend to emphasize theory and
\noverlook practice. Students are by definition eloquent in stating
\ntheories and principles of good composition and its proper
\nteaching. However they do not know how to write themselves.<\/p>\n
Given all the considerations above, it is a certainty that
\nwriting lessons should be handled in a professional way. The
\nrespondents believe that the following recommendations are
\nworthwhile for improving college writing.<\/p>\n
Table 2: Suggestions for improving college writing (percentage of
\nrespondents)<\/p>\n
1. Instructors as writers themselves 65.5<\/p>\n
2. Emphasis on practice rather than theory 51.7<\/p>\n
3. To be taught by Indonesian teachers 27.5<\/p>\n
4. Responsibility of all lecturers 20.6<\/p>\n
Apparently students hope to be taught by a writer-instructor,
\nwho knows not only how to teach writing, but also has first-hand
\nexperience in writing. Nonwriter instructors, lacking empirical
\nexperience, tend to emphasize theories of writing. Consequently,
\nneither the instructor nor the students have pieces of writing to
\nshow off.<\/p>\n
From Table 2 above, it would seem respondents do not think
\nthat Indonesian lecturers should teach college writing. It has
\nbeen common practice that some subjects like those in MKDU are
\ntaught by young and inexperienced lecturers. This two-credit MKDU
\nor mata kuliah dasar umum (general subject) is rated as a boring
\nand a second-class course. Students take the course just to
\nfulfill credits requirements for their degrees.<\/p>\n
Curriculum-wise, the teaching of writing is left to Indonesian
\nor foreign language lecturers who often become the scapegoat when
\nstudents fail to write properly. This erroneous attitude is
\nprevalent even among college professors and should be corrected
\naccordingly for the following reasons.<\/p>\n
* All lecturers are in fact language users and automatically
\nfunction as models that all students may want to emulate.
\nTherefore one could say that they should be held responsible for
\ndeveloping writing skills in students. This implies that all
\nlecturers should be reasonably proficient in writing to avoid a
\nsituation where, what the students have learned from professional
\nIndonesian instructors, would be unlearned subconsciously as they
\nare incorrectly taught by non-Indonesian lecturers.<\/p>\n
* Almost all courses require students to write assignments on
\ntopics such as research, chapter and book reporting. Their
\nwriting skills are understandably expected to develop. However,
\nas the maxim says, quantity does not guarantee quality. Those
\nassignments do help them master the subject matter but do not
\nimprove writing quality. What most lecturers do is simply "rubber
\nstamping". The students do not get any feedback from them. In
\nmost cases the assignments are not returned, as though they are
\n"gone with the wind".<\/p>\n
Improving writing instruction is not a one-man show of
\nlanguage teachers. It needs a collective commitment of many
\nparties involved. Dwelling on the findings aforementioned, I
\nsubmit the following as a guideline.<\/p>\n
* Common to all is the change of attitude. Developing writing
\nskills for students should be the responsibility of all teachers,
\nno matter what their subject matters are. This implies that high
\nproficiency in writing should be inherently part of the teaching
\nprofession, especially at college level.<\/p>\n
* Writing instruction should be repositioned in the context of
\nmutual interaction, in which students are treated as human beings
\nthat need rewards, encouragement and motivation. Returned
\nassignments with comments, corrections and advice for improvement
\nare indicative of professional writing instruction.<\/p>\n
* It is high time to adopt the policy of writing across the
\ncurriculum, where writing is used as a central learning tool in
\nclasses outside language departments. Rather than relegating
\nwriting instruction to language or literature classes, the policy
\npromotes collaboration between language teachers and nonlanguage
\nteachers.<\/p>\n
Research in developed countries such as the United States and
\nthe United Kingdom shows that this policy works well. It leads to
\na high degree of proficiency in writing as well as in
\nspecialization. It is apt to envision the situation where our
\nintellectuals are not only masterful in their specialization but
\nalso competitive and prolific writers.<\/p>\n
The writer is a lecturer at the graduate school of the
\nTeachers Training Institute (IKIP) in Bandung.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/writing-needs-more-recognition-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}