Structured Collaboration for Novice Writers

In recent conversation with a colleague about active learning in the composition classroom, the nature of writing came up; that is, do we see composition as primarily a solitary pursuit, in which case collaboration would be less effective than active learning advocates might like, or does collaborative work in the composition classroom improve the process and, therefore, the product. Obviously, individual authors, at least to some degree, must compose their thoughts and, since our culture values originality and regrets its absence, there must be some solitary work in composition.

This seems reasonable to me. However, I’m less certain about how much solitary contemplation and experiment might be needed for better writing, which, in any case, would vary from person to person. I also wonder how we would define solitary and collaborative work. Standard peer review, of course, is collaborative, but then wouldn’t discussing the subject of your writing with an individual or a group, also be collaborative? Couldn’t working with a group to analyze the rhetoric of an argument be a useful collaboration for writers to apply to their own composition? Reading texts of high merit certainly may help writers improve their own skills, especially if they do this a lot, and so then why wouldn’t a group discussing what makes the text a worthwhile example be useful as well?

Then, when I think about the rhetorical situation, specifically the emphasis we put on audience awareness in first year composition, even the most solitary writer is probably imagining one or more readers, and even though this is only an imaginative construct, might it not still fit in an expanded definition of collaboration—hypothetical collaboration? Regardless, how much more valuable, then, might be an actual audience?

If we agree that skilled writers past and present worked primarily in solitude, then we would have to assume that they never discussed their work in progress with their family, friends, or peers. We have to assume their daily conversations never initiated, confirmed, or challenged their ideas while composing. And even if any of these assumptions are true for a few particular writers whose work we regard highly, could we, then, safely assume that undergraduates have the talent, maturity, and drive that would make most collaboration superfluous?

Montaigne wrote in his private tower, but he did say that the authors of the books in his library were his audience. Shakespeare had his fellow actors whom he could call his collaborators at least insofar as their performances could provide him with immediate feedback on his scripts. At the start of their poetic careers, Wordsworth and Coleridge collaborated. Hawthorne and Melville exchanged manuscripts, and on Hawthorne’s advice, Melville amended his whale adventure into his highly engaging moral allegory Moby Dick. Steinbeck brought copies of his short story manuscripts to his friends in Monterey to receive their advice, and the Bloomsbury writers gathered with an informal regularity to share their ideas and texts with each other. In short, I’m skeptical of the idea that fine authors have not collaborated as a way to improve their work.

Nevertheless, I had to concede in this conversation that, in the case of my own undergraduate first-year composition experience, there was no collaboration of the sort common to active learning. I had no peer review, no paper conferences with my teachers, and the feedback I received on my work was mostly prescriptive. Did I turn out to be an acceptable writer? I have done reasonably well, but I might have likely reached professional competence sooner had my undergraduate circumstances been different. Ask me now if I think I would have benefitted from peer reviews, paper conferences, small group analysis and discussion, and collaborative prescriptive exercises and, to answer honestly, I would have to say yes.

The individual effort is still there, as are the solitary moments of composition, those drafts composed in dormitories and libraries, on park benches and at kitchen tables. But still I would say that most, if not all, good writing involves some collaboration and that structured collaboration for novice writers would very likely enhance the writing process for them even in its solitary phases.