Monroe 1

John Monroe

Professor Evan Andersson

WRT 2

May 23rd, 2023

Writing: Output over Meaning

It was interesting to see how reading and writing are viewed through the lens of academia

in these articles. Identifying various levels of ability based on grade level, particularly in writing.

With all academic writings guidelines are set in place, specific word count prompts that require

you to address a,b, and c. This can render the author incapable of being creative, being squeezed

into a metaphoric box results in unimaginative content. Though there needs to be some

semblance of instruction to discern writing from unconscious scribes, An ambiguous instruction

benefits those later in academia, as the less instruction you give the more precious that student is

in explaining their own idea. This also gives more variance for the reader, as specific instruction

would only produce essay’s which the instructor manufactured. Which in particular cases is

necessary, often to test students knowing the material that they are supposed to comprehend in

order to be successful in the field.

Reading comprehension however, is a more nuanced skill to measure. Unlike writing,

there lies a more black and white understanding, you either read it or you didn’t. At an

elementary level, one would hope to be able to recite a quick surface level summary of what is

happening or what one is saying in an article or novel. However as comprehension gets more

advanced, its capacity grows exponentially from a quick summary as a more complex
 Monroe 2

comprehension folds in context from other readings to inform the current understanding of

another reading. Reading comprehension can take the form of a iceberg metaphor, with the actual

events or happenings of the piece being the visible iceberg, while the impact the writing has on

the reader, the greater questions the piece, and or the real world connections it brings to the

forefront is represented by the buried ice underneath the ocean. Let's take this exercise and apply

it to one of the most identifiable pieces of media, Star Wars. On the surface it's a story about a

farm boy saving a princess from an evil dude in a black suit, which as a kid along with all the

explosions and lightsabers was all you were gonna get from the interaction. Though looking

beneath the surface and examining Lucas’s inspirations we see that this space opera takes note of

Jose Campbell’s Hero’s Journey which taps into a primal instinct in narrative dating back to the

story of Gilgamesh. The father son dynamic presented in the film taps into the arch redemption

leading to the redeemed fulfilling his life’s purpose, under a backdrop of a predetermined “force”

echoing the flows of good and evil. The explanation I gave was more concluded and harder to

follow than the basic synapsis of the film. Which again plays off the struggle which writers have

as they progress, style verse clarity.

What fascinates me about academic writing is as Scott Crossly puts it, the further one

goes along in academic writing the more confused and muddled the writing gets to be. Which if

you think about it makes sense, you advance in grade level, more is asked of you. There is

demand to articulate complex ideas, you go from writing a report on who won the Revolutionary

War and why, to one day explaining taking the argument of America’s validity as a Republic or

an oligarchy. Though with the advancement of demonstration, it seems that clarity is seen as an

afterthought, in particular grammar. Resulting in students' advancement in writing not being

 Monroe 3

equal to the projection abstraction and clarity of writing. Which bears the question of what we

are doing in education that doesn’t focus on making a well rounded writer, focusing on all

aspects of the process. Well for one many students are placed with a word limit to hit so they are

going to focus on getting the content out first before worrying about how the grammar is going

to come out. Another reason can be attributed to the fact that grammar is looked at as a tedious

endeavor, out on the margins of writing. Finally modern technology has also expedited these

processes whether through spell speck or even devices such as word tune.

Yet these tools have their own limitations especially in accessing writing. In Jin ho

Wang’s automated essay scoring analysis they emphasize that it presents limitations in nuance

and adaptability outside following the prompt the AI is given. Not surprising that an AI would

lack this talent, it’s more suitable for detecting sentence structure and its use is for a much larger

base rather than a small classroom. It also points out that the AI keeps a consistent score across

the board. Though I think it points out a greater issue in the schooling with robotic grading in

combination with an increase in one aspect of writing and stagnation in another. As one aspect of

writing is prescribed, students will gravitate towards style over clarity, a worst thought is the idea

of students writing for a computer algorithm rather than practicing their ability to articulate. It’s

important to note as well that writing to machines would take out the human expression, writing

to a void in a sense. So what could come to the forefront are students swinging the complete

opposite of what they are doing now, which is being as simplistic as possible yet obtaining no

elaboration or eloquence. Despite AI being consistent you can be constantly wrong which I

believe would be the case in AES, if anything it would increase the use of computer generated

essay’s as they would probably score the highest on this system. Though understanding the
 Monroe 4

context of this piece written in 2008, the idea of chatGBT wasn’t on the radar, regardless the

discussion puts into question the value of writing and what its suppose to accomplish which is a

self express of retained information, done well it's considered an art and thought an AI can

discern a plot of a movie it can’t tell you how to feel when a piece of writing infects your own

constitution in a such a profound way it echoes throughout your being for rest of your life.

Work Cited

Burnstein , Jill. “Academic Approaches and Attitudes towards CAA: A Qualitative Study.”
Automated Evaluation of Essays and Short Answers, 2001,
caaconference.lboro.ac.uk/pastConferences/2001/proceedings/k2.pdf.

Crossley, Scott A., et al. “The Development of Writing Proficiency as a Function of Grade
Level: A Linguistic Analysis.” Arizona State University,
asu.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/the-development-of-writing-proficiency-as-a-functio
n-of-grade-lev. Accessed 9 May 2023.

Miccichie, Laura. “Making a Case for Rhetorical Grammar - California State University
...” Making a Case for Rhetorical Grammar, 2004,
www.csun.edu/~bashforth/305_PDF/305_PDF_Grammar/MakingACaseForRhetoricalGra
mmar_Micciche.pdf.

Michaud , Michael. “Composing a Career, from Expressivism to Essayism: A Conversation

with Bruce Ballenger.” Composition Forum, 2019,
www.compositionforum.com/issue/41/bruce-ballenger-interview.php.

Pepclio , Geraldine. “Home.” The WAC Clearinghouse, wac.colostate.edu/comppile/.

Accessed 9 May 2023.

Wang, Jinhao. “Automated Essay Scoring Versus Human Scoring: A Correlational Study.”
CITE Journal, 2008,
citejournal.org/volume-8/issue-4-08/english-language-arts/automated-essay-scoring-versus
-human-scoring-a-correlational-study/.