Talk:Writing about Writing

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 October 2018. The result of the discussion was keep.

As I continue to fill out my article, I've recently been working on expanding the "criticism" section per a suggestion from our class ambassador. I also fix minor Wikipedia-form related issues she pointed out to me. I've referenced 2 more sources since my initial development, but plan on referencing at least 3 more:

Bird, Barbara. "Meaning-Making Concepts: Basic Writer’s Access to Verbal Culture"
Wardle, Elizabeth. "Continuing the Dialogue: Follow-up Comments on "Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions"
Charlton, Jonikka. "Seeing is Believing: Writing Studies with 'Basic Writing' Students"

Bcgelms (talk) 18:54, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My article is still a work in progress. Mainly I'm hoping to expand on the benefits and pitfalls, but I haven't finished reading all of my source material so hopefully some new points will emerge that I can incorporate.

So far, I've consulted an article/case study by Douglas Down and Elizabeth Wardle that is recognized as being the "birth of WAW." I've also consulted the foremost textbook on WAW, written by the same scholars.

I currently have 5 more sources I am still working through:

Bird, Barbara. "Meaning-Making Concepts: Basic Writer’s Access to Verbal Culture"
Carter, Shannon. "Writing About Writing in Basic Writing: A Teacher/Researcher/Activist Narrative"
Charlton, Jonikka. "Seeing is Believing: Writing Studies with 'Basic Writing' Students"
Kutney, Joshua. "Will Writing Awareness Transfer to Writing Performance? Response to Douglas Downs and Elizabeth Wardle, 'Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions'"
Wardle, Elizabeth. "Continuing the Dialogue: Follow-up Comments on "Teaching about Writing, Righting Misconceptions"

Bcgelms (talk) 22:24, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strong achievement, possible bias in Reception section

I applaud this article for bringing out this important current movement in composition pedagogy for the benefit of WP's readers. I might suggest also that the section "Reception" might be revised or omitted since it seems to present a favorably biased perspective on the book that contrasts with the neutral presentation elsewhere. I don't think its omission would harm the article, as the critical discussion has brought out positive characterizations of the book's reception in a more balanced way.

—Webster Newbold (talk) 19:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about Writing, 2nd edition

Will there be any revisions to this page, to include the recent 2nd edition of the WAW reader? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.10.137.74 (talk) 00:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]