I'll reiterate that I do think even GT people use that brainstorm/organize/draft/copy edit process, Grin. Really, they do! It's just that they do those steps in their heads, or they do them so fast that people on the outside don't recognize them, or they have such an innate sense of mechanics (or organization or whatever) that they don't appear to have to do much/anything in that step.

But I have NEVER seen a person whose writing doesn't go through the brainstorm/organize/draft/copy edit process in SOME fashion and come out better on the other side with the writer feeling better about the process.

By the time I sit down to write a paper, I have done the brainstorming and organizing in my head, but I've done it, so I don't have to revise much/at all. And I have a good sense of mechanics, so I rarely need to edit much. I used to write my 5-page argument papers for my philosophy classes in the 30-60 minutes before class and get A+s on them. And that was on an old electric typewriter, not a computer! So no editing that didn't involve white-out!

But as complexity increases--and it increased for me in graduate school--the process and time to use the process becomes more important.

I recommend against viewing a person's going through the process in an abbreviated way or in a less than typical manner as meaning that the brainstorm/organize/draft/copy edit process is "an ND way of teaching writing." I disagree with that characterization. I believe strongly that this series of steps is the way the writing process works. Period. You must start with ideas (or start with a specific example and use that to develop the ideas, but it amounts to the same thing) and move to the mechanics to be effective.


Kriston