I find it much easier to teach my students how to structure their writing if I
give them these guidelines.  Then they know what I expect for supporting
details and point development.  I am trying to do what is most benefiocial for
my kids, but I know there are those who would say that the structure I am
asking for is a bad idea...please provide some feedback on this.

Topic Sentence
Point #1
    Support #1
    Support #2
Point #2
    Support #1
    Support #2
Point #3
    Support #1
    Support #2
Conclusion

AACProfRyk@aol.com

Here I am again jumping into the fray (I am trying to put off my correspondence course).  What I believe is wrong with 5 paragraph essays is that some teachers will actually grade down if a student decides that her or his masterful work needs 6 paragraphs.  I think that as long as this is a guideline, but not the end all requirement, then it is a good tool.  Notice the word "TOOL" meaning a device used for a purpose.  I think that when it becomes the product that students' creativity and writing ability gets squashed.  I also think that if you teach 5 paragraph essays, you should also share freewriting, writing with the computer screen turned off.......

Just an opinion -D

There are two main reasons why I don't like the 5pe and it's sinister
siblings.  One is that it is not an authentic form.  The only place you will
find it is in the classroom. Why would we teach a form of discourse that
students will not encounter in the real world.  Now, I realize there may be
a few state writing assessments out there that expect the 5pe.  If that's
the case, teach it and tell the kids the only place they'll use it is on the
stupid test.

Some argue that the 5pe prepares students for the kinds of writing they will
have to do in college.  Leif has some interesting perspectives on this, so
I'll let him chime in here, but there are many college writing folks on this
list who say they have to teach their students to undo the 5pe.  I remember
talking to one freshman comp prof at Central Michigan University who begged
high school English teachers to stop teaching the damned thing.  He was
tired of spending so much time trying to get his students to move away from
the 5pe formula.

The second reason, and the more important one, I think, is that the
organization of a piece of writing should come from within the writer.  It
is part of the discovery process that happens when writers construct a
meaningful piece of text.  Now, for this to work, students need to have lots
of experience with text--both oral and written.  To give students a formula
upon which to hang their ideas really cheats them out of learning how to do
that themselves.  For them to develop the complex thinking that goes into an
effective argument, for example, they need lots of experience in the art of
argumentation.

Now, HOW we help students encounter textual experiences is food for lots of
threads on this list.  But there is a current discussion about graphic
organizers.  This is one way to help students organize their writing, their
thinking.  Someone also mentioned a while back about using sticky notes to
help kids manipulate ideas. Peer conferencing often works.  Kids pick up on
illogical arguments pretty easily, usually.

And, now, an anecdote.  Several years ago, when Michigan was still piloting
it's writing assessment, I scored some of the 8th grade pilot tests.  It
didn't take me long to realize that some teachers had schooled their
students in the 5pe.  And almost without exception, these papers did not
receive passing scores.  The writing was boring and the ideas poorly
developed.  I mentioned this to one of the people from the state department
of ed who was overseeing our efforts.  She said I wasn't the first person to
notice this.

There are some who argue that the 5pe is just one bullet in the arsenal of
writing techniques.  I think this is over-rating the 5pe.  I don't think it
has a place, per se, unless it happens to occur more or less organically
from a student's own wrestling with purpose, audience, voice, etc.

That's all for now.  I have to think about hypertext which is about as far
removed from the 5pe as you can get.  And just think, within 10 years, maybe
fewer, our students will be growing in hypertext fluency and expect us to
keep up with them.  Are we going to be ready???  How far out of the water
will hypertext blow some of us who cling to the idea that all writing must
have a beginning, a middle, and an end?  Oooo.  I can't wait to find out!
Nancy

I have been a good girl all summer and have read, and lurked, and rarely
replied to any posts, but now I'm flinging myself into the fray.  I'm sure
others will reply much more eloquently than I, but here is my 2 cents.

I feel the imfamous 5PE does a disservice to our students for a number of
reasons.  Similarly, I feel it continues to be taught for a number of
reasons, some of which have to do more with politics and human nature than
teaching.

The 5PE binds kids into just one direction of thinking, and just one type
of structure.  If the structure is opened up, the thinking is opened up and
vice versa.  I want my students to think.  I want them to think about their
purpose, their audience, their tone, and how structure can be manipulated
to best achieve those aims.  I want them to be able to weave concessions
into their persuasive papers.  I want them to be able to compare and
contrast in some essays.  I want them to write narratives. The 5PE puts
limits or binds those abilities.

I'm also using the word "think" here in terms of critical thinking.  Just
settling back into the comfortable old 5PE format does not require as much
critical thinking.  At least for the students I have taught, in 3 different
districts, many like what is easy and does _not_ require much thought.
They memorize that magic formula and plug away.  I don't know what grade
you teach, and that may make a difference in our experiences with our
students.  I teach 11th grade.

How does one offer another structural form?  Through classroom study of
models.  We read essays from all over the place.  I culled a great little
human interest piece last year from the newspaper about Chelsea Clinton
going off to college.  I cut it up into separate paragraphs and had the
students decide what order they thought the thing went in and tell why.  We
compared versions around the room, then with the origianl.  We talked about
what the author's purpose, and audience were, and her main ideas.  We then
talked about how those factors had shaped the structure of the article.
There are some essays in our lit. book we read and analyzed for structure
such as Ben Franklin's "The Whistle" and "A Witch Trial at Mt. Holly", and
I brought in one by Clarence Page that I found one morning, and by some
other people.  These are all great for looking at point of view, and irony
also.  Then the students had some models and reasons why those models
looked like they did.  Then they could write their own pieces with some
background behind them.

Here is another flaw in the 5PE plan.  It depends on this pattern:
Topic Sentence
Point #1
    Support #1
    Support #2
Point #2
    Support #1
    Support #2
Point #3
    Support #1
    Support #2
Conclusion
Don't we want kids to incorporate quotations (in lit. papers or I-Search
papers anyway), and elaborate and extrapolate, and make connections on
Support #1 and then on Support #2?  Mammoth paragraphs result from this
which are very user unfriendly.  Then, sometimes as the elaborations and
thoughts flow about Support #1, they still support Point #1, but are no
longer that close to Support #2.
 
Now, about teachers.  That article derived from Chelsea Clinton won't be as
good for this coming year now that Chelsea is a big old sophomore.   So
I'll find something else.  But this leads to something I think about some
teachers, including me.  We are very busy people and we cling to lessons
because we did them last year.  It is a known, safe, lesson, and also one
that doesn't require additional work to start from scratch.  But in this
case it is easy to find other articles because they are literally
everywhere.  Eventually I ask students to bring in their own.

Another reason I think teachers cling to the 5PE is because they perceive
it as easier to teach.  Please don't take this as a flame, _I don't mean to
be mean at all_, but you yourself said:
>I find it much easier to teach my students how to structure their writing
if I
>give them these guidelines.  Then they know what I expect for supporting
>details and point development.

Yes, if you only give them one set of guidelines it is easier for everyone,
but easiest isn't always best.  Give them guidelines that are more fluid.
 
There are other reasons but this is long, and others will have answers for
you as well.

Mary Kirkpatrick

> settling back into the comfortable old 5PE format does not require as much
> critical thinking.  At least for the students I have taught, in 3 different
> districts, many like what is easy and does _not_ require much thought.
> They memorize that magic formula and plug away.

 I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing all of the time.  I teach sophomores
who are required to take an End-of-Course test which consists of a critical essay in
response to a question about world literature and must do so within a prescribed amount
of time.  The evaluators are looking at their organizational skills, but the major
emphasis is on their evaluation of the work in response to the prompt.  In this
situation, if they have memorized the "magic formula," they don't have to waste time
thinking about how they are going to structure their answer, but can get on with the
meat of the response, which is how they increase their score on this test.  I agree that
if this is the only tool I put in their composition toolbox, I do them a disservice,
but if I send them in to take this test without this particular tool and the skill to
recognize that it is appropriate to use it here, I put them at a disadvantage.

 
> How does one offer another structural form?  Through classroom study of
> models.  We read essays from all over the place.  I culled a great little
> human interest piece last year from the newspaper about Chelsea Clinton
> going off to college.  I cut it up into separate paragraphs and had the
> students decide what order they thought the thing went in and tell why.  We
> compared versions around the room, then with the origianl.  We talked about
> what the author's purpose, and audience were, and her main ideas.  We then
> talked about how those factors had shaped the structure of the article.
> There are some essays in our lit. book we read and analyzed for structure
> such as Ben Franklin's "The Whistle" and "A Witch Trial at Mt. Holly", and
> I brought in one by Clarence Page that I found one morning, and by some
> other people.  These are all great for looking at point of view, and irony
> also.  Then the students had some models and reasons why those models
> looked like they did.  Then they could write their own pieces with some
> background behind them.

 I think the key here is that they could write their own pieces.  Many times
students can use these models to improve their own writing skills when they are allowed
freedom of choice in what kind of writing and on what topics they wish to do.  But
sometimes their writing tasks require them to recognize that the 5PE is the appropriate
choice.  In the recent past we had a discussion on the list about burying some overused
words and phrases in a "graveyard" never to be used again.  There was wailing and
gnashing of teeth from many people about condemning some of those forever and lots of
examples of times when they would be appropriate for use.  I have a hard time
distinguishing between that example and the 5PE discussion.  I see the 5PE as a TOOL,
and instead of banning it from their use forever, I'd like to teach my students how to
use it best.
 
> Here is another flaw in the 5PE plan.  It depends on this pattern:
> Topic Sentence
> Point #1
>     Support #1
>     Support #2
> Point #2
>     Support #1
>     Support #2
> Point #3
>     Support #1
>     Support #2
> Conclusion
> Don't we want kids to incorporate quotations (in lit. papers or I-Search
> papers anyway), and elaborate and extrapolate, and make connections on
> Support #1 and then on Support #2?  Mammoth paragraphs result from this
> which are very user unfriendly.  Then, sometimes as the elaborations and
> thoughts flow about Support #1, they still support Point #1, but are no
> longer that close to Support #2.

 But, again, as you mentioned previously, can't we show them models that have
varied this pattern effectively?  Expand on how flexible this tool can be?
 

> Now, about teachers.  That article derived from Chelsea Clinton won't be as
> good for this coming year now that Chelsea is a big old sophomore.   So
> I'll find something else.  But this leads to something I think about some
> teachers, including me.  We are very busy people and we cling to lessons
> because we did them last year.  It is a known, safe, lesson, and also one
> that doesn't require additional work to start from scratch.  But in this
> case it is easy to find other articles because they are literally
> everywhere.  Eventually I ask students to bring in their own.

 I wholeheartedly agree on this one.  The biggest help this list has been to me
is that I no longer have to re-invent the wheel every time I plan to do something.  My
files from this list and others almost always mean that when I want to begin something
new, revive something from the past, or add to something I have now, someone on the
list has already given me ideas of how to go about it.  New teachers, teachers who have
four and five preps daily, teachers who are loaded with extra-curricular activities in
addition to their daily preps and their families and their churches, etc., often don't
have time to reflect as well or as long as they might like before they actually
implement instruction.  Activities like the one you describe above seem simple and old
hat to a lot of us, but I can remember when I first came across that idea ( a lot of
year after I had been successfully working with the 5PE!) and can remember wondering,
"Why didn't I think of that!?"  The value of our list serve is that we continue to
bounce ideas off each other, and that someone finally comes up with PRACTICAL ideas to
help those who are struggling with a concept, whether it is because they lack enough
experience to have seen it work in different ways, or because at this point in there
careers they are philosophically opposed to the idea.  I think a lot of us have to see
HOW these things work, and more than once and in more than one way sometimes before we
can change philosophically or can begin to incorporate new ideas into our plans.
>
> Another reason I think teachers cling to the 5PE is because they perceive
> it as easier to teach.  Please don't take this as a flame, _I don't mean to
> be mean at all_, but you yourself said:
> >I find it much easier to teach my students how to structure their writing
> if I
> >give them these guidelines.  Then they know what I expect for supporting
> >details and point development.
>
> Yes, if you only give them one set of guidelines it is easier for everyone,
> but easiest isn't always best.  Give them guidelines that are more fluid.

 I agree.  Lots of practice with lots of variations of writing helps students see
that there is a reason that we have different modes of writing and helps them decide
which is appropriate for the task they have at hand.  I don't think we are far from
agreement.

Linda O'Donnell

I believe that sometimes formulas are useful because they provide the
writer with a rough reminder of what is supposed to be in an essay.
However, they are most useful when the kind of writing being done has a
fairly standardized organizational pattern. Legal arguments and scientific
journal articles are examples. But when the type of writing to be done
comes in a variety of patterns, teaching only one pattern can be
misleading.

The 5pe is most often used to teach the writing of persuasive essays. But
not all persuasion involves the giving and supporting of reasons. Much of
it involves telling stories or giving generalizations supported by
examples. And even in the cases that do involve giving reasons, you would
be hard pressed to find a real-life example that used exactly 3 reasons
supported by 2 "details."

Furthermore, the grader of persuasive essays for such purposes as the
National Assessment of Educational Progress will nearly always demand that
writers deal with opposing arguments in addition to giving their own side
of the issue. So even if we would like to say that we are teaching an
artificial form for artificial purposes like assessment, it still doesn't
work very well.

In the end, I don't think it hurts for you to say that in a persuasive
essay writers generally both support their own side and refute the
opposition. I also don't think it hurts for you to point out that there are
two or three common patterns that writers use to accomplish this,
especially if you can bring to class several readable examples to
illustrate your point. But to carry the formula to the extreme that is
often done with the 5pe does more harm than good.

Bill

William J. McCleary
Associate Prof. of English
Coordinator of Secondary English
SUNY at Cortland

 Nancy dove in with relish:  <<Ok.  I'll dive in here. >> and she said:

<<There are two main reasons why I don't like the 5pe and it's sinister
siblings.>>

I did actually read your post and your many good ideas.  Still I could not get
past your constant misuse of "it's vs. its." Normally I am not so anal
retentive, but when I see someone being so critical when she or he is not
perfect, either...hey, it annoys me.  ;-)

At some point we just need to teach the students ENGLISH, for crying out loud.
I find, unless the school has had some extraordinarily privileged kids, many
students in this country, once they reach the college level, can't speak or
write coherently (I have taught at the college level in PA, OH, and CA).  Yes,
I want students to love literature.  Yes, I want them to feel free when they
write.  Still, I believe certain standards ought to be met, just as I believe
people ought to meet a certain standard of competence as drivers before we
give them a driver's license.

Would I, personally (I have a master's in English and have also published a
book) have been stifled by the 5 paragraph form when I was a student?  Yes and
no.  It was first taught to me in college in 1980, and I liked it.  It gave me
a way to structure my ideas....but once I had moved past it, I would have,
admittedly, hated having it imposed upon me.  But the point is...I had moved
past it.  That is, I had certain skills first.

How many students nowadays REALLY have the English skills to write like the
published fiction writers and professional essayists we constantly put before
them in their anthologies?  I didn't have all of those skills when I entered
college (though I did, at least, have a decent grasp of basic grammar and
mechanics). I have yet to see a student (well, okay, maybe one or two at most)
who can use all of these skills wisely now.  Frankly, most students I see now
at the college level--and I am talking about entering students--are
practically illiterate.  I am serious.

Just as an example:  a friend of mine at a technical college in Ohio recently
told me of a student who was asked to write a descriptive paragraph.  The
class had spent the week going over passages in the textbook which appealed to
the five senses and all had a basic thesis and yadda yadda yadda.  This
student turned in a paragraph that was (as could be expected) pretty much all
"telling" and very little "showing."  So, my teacher friend met with the
student in a conference and asked her to provide better descriptive details.

A few days later, my friend got a paragraph back from this student in which
she claimed to walk 500 miles to school each day, had a 50-foot microwave in
her kitchen, and ate 50 foot hot dogs.  Upon questioning, the student made it
clear she (sheepishly) thought she was providing the kinds of specifics she'd
been asked for, but the student had no genuine conception of how long a mile
or a yard or a foot were in real life.  As a reminder: this was a student at
the COLLEGE level.

Let me ask you: can these students be asked to write essays without giving
them any direction in regard to essay structure or even paragraph structure?
I don't think so.  When I have offered students this freedom, they tend to
flounder and ask me for more direction (this includes their asking me to give
them topics for essays, rather than me giving them the freedom to pick their
own, a fact which astonishes me!)  Anymore I have found that entering college
students, unless they place out of freshman comp on the AP exam, need some
*serious* instruction in how to write...how to think....and how to spell...and
how to use "its vs it's."

Sorry for sounding snide, but I just get disgusted at theory, theory, theory
and sometimes how divorced it is from REALITY.

Peace,
-S

Isn't this a bit reductive?  What do you mean by ballistic?  Do you have
personal experience regarding this?  Why not begin with a narrative lead and
then make your point afterwards?  Which respondents are you specifically
talking about?  Can you quote them?
>>
>> I believe that sometimes formulas are useful because they provide the
>> writer with a rough reminder of what is supposed to be in an essay.
>> However, they are most useful when the kind of writing being done has a
>> fairly standardized organizational pattern. Legal arguments and scientific
>> journal articles are examples. But when the type of writing to be done
>> comes in a variety of patterns, teaching only one pattern can be
>> misleading.

Why do you believe this?  What personal experience can you relay that would
support this?  Exactly what is an essay and what should be in an essay?  And
who else in the profession supports your opinion?  What do other
professionals say?
>>
>> The 5pe is most often used to teach the writing of persuasive essays. But
>> not all persuasion involves the giving and supporting of reasons. Much of
>> it involves telling stories or giving generalizations supported by
>> examples. And even in the cases that do involve giving reasons, you would
>> be hard pressed to find a real-life example that used exactly 3 reasons
>> supported by 2 "details."

Again, can you support the fact you state in the first sentence?  What
support do you have for your statement regarding persuasion?  Is this a good
place to bring in the Sophists?  Plato?  Are there any dissenting voices
whose arguments you can refute based on direct observation?  Can you put
that observation within a context that is meaningful to the reader and that
supports your argument?
>>
>> Furthermore, the grader of persuasive essays for such purposes as the
>> National Assessment of Educational Progress will nearly always demand that
>> writers deal with opposing arguments in addition to giving their own side
>> of the issue. So even if we would like to say that we are teaching an
>> artificial form for artificial purposes like assessment, it still doesn't
>> work very well.

Again, upon what foundation do you base your statements?  Is the NAEP a
valid measurement?  Who else says so?  And upon what resource are you basing
your statement regarding the NAEP information?
>>
>> In the end, I don't think it hurts for you to say that in a persuasive
>> essay writers generally both support their own side and refute the
>> opposition. I also don't think it hurts for you to point out that there are
>> two or three common patterns that writers use to accomplish this,
>> especially if you can bring to class several readable examples to
>> illustrate your point. But to carry the formula to the extreme that is
>> often done with the 5pe does more harm than good.

Good first draft.  You have a lot of ideas to flesh out here.  Think about
being more specific and drawing in more voices.  Also, consider using
anecdotal or (even better) case study research to support your argument that
the 5pe is one approach to teaching writing. And, think about including
opposing arguments and how you would counter those.

>> Bill
Sorry, Bill.  I couldn't resist.  Before you think I'm trying to sting you
here, let me point out that you could make the same comments to my previous
post on this issue.  I didn't support any of my statements either.

But I can. :->

Nancy
Nancy G. Patterson

paking

Yvette

Hey Nancy,

Lay off of Bill! Pick on someone your own size. Seriously, as a former
student of his (he's one of those SMART professors) I have to say I learned
a lot from him. Not only that, but my reaction as I read your comments was,
"Wow--these are too many questions!" Just a thought that made me remember
what it is like on the student side. I love commenting on my students
papers, and I always tell them that a bunch of red is good,not bad; however,
if this was my essay, I think I would feel overwhelmed and discouraged--to
the point I might not want to revise. I guess commenting is a hard, fine
line to walk between honesty and nitpickiness!

Deb

From:  Patricia King

I also value the information which is shared on this listserv, and I take away
many good ideas.  I feel that the 5pe has gotten a bad rap, however,  and I hope
to offer another viewpoint, despite all the other arguments in opposition to its
use.

Going on vacation for a week, and I'll be interested in any reactions when I
return.  Have a great fourth, everyone!!

Kate Mura
St. Paul, MN

That said, I will respond to this one message:

<<     I'd like to have more background about the assignment. For example,
 what grade level are we talking about? Is this format used in all papers
 during the year, or just for one assignment? Have these students had
 other experience with organization?
      I don't understand why the essay has to be exactly five paragraphs --
 why not six? [My "rule" is a minimum of four.]  And I do have reservations
 about only two supporting sentences per paragraph.>>

This is for 9th grade summer school students.  I have found that their
teachers in middle school told them to write 5 sentence paragraphs, and I feel
that this is not adequate support for any points they might make, especially
since many cannot create complete sentences in the first place.  11 sentences
ensures that I get three points that support the main idea (topic sentence)
and two supports for each of those points.  We start with one paragraph, then
we add an intro and conclusion paragraph, then we go for a four-paragraph
paper, then we end with a five-paragraph essay.  By the time we are here, most
understand what I want when I say to support their points, and we drop off one
point and two supports in each body paragraph, which makes them eight
sentences long.

I use this format for persuasive and expository essays; descriptive and
narrative writing doesn't follow these strictures.

The 9th grade exam has a writing portion which is worth 25% of the exam grade,
and I give them the option of writing four- or five-paragraph essays, with
eight- or eleven-sentence paragraphs.  By this time, what I specifically look
for is structure and support.

Thanks again to all for your feedback, and I will consult the archives first
before posting questions such as this.  Happy Independence Day!
 

AACProfRyk

>Nancy dove in with relish:  <<Ok.  I'll dive in here. >> and she said:
><<There are two main reasons why I don't like the 5pe and it's sinister
>siblings.>>
>I did actually read your post and your many good ideas.  Still I could not get
>past your constant misuse of "it's vs. its." Normally I am not so anal
>retentive, but when I see someone being so critical when she or he is not
>perfect, either...hey, it annoys me.  ;-)

You're kidding right? We're discussing an issue that is particularly
problematic because it reflects either two pedagocial paradigms that at
times grind against each other, or a misunderstanding of the writing process
and literacy theory.  And you are chiding me for typographical errors?  I'm
so sorry that my flying fingers created a situation that annoyed you.
 
>At some point we just need to teach the students ENGLISH, for crying out loud.
>I find, unless the school has had some extraordinarily privileged kids, many
>students in this country, once they reach the college level, can't speak or
>write coherently (I have taught at the college level in PA, OH, and CA).  Yes,
>I want students to love literature.  Yes, I want them to feel free when they
>write.  Still, I believe certain standards ought to be met, just as I believe
>people ought to meet a certain standard of competence as drivers before we
>give them a driver's license.

You seem to be suggesting that I would not pass muster if I had apply for a
license to drive and English classroom.  Because is left out an apostrophe?!
Or inserted one where it didn't belong?  We have stooped to such triviality
and leaps of logic to assume that I shouldn't teach because an e-mail
message failed the apostrophe test?  That such typos are evidence of my
abilities in the classroom?

>Let me ask you: can these students be asked to write essays without giving
>them any direction in regard to essay structure or even paragraph structure?
>I don't think so.  When I have offered students this freedom, they tend to
>flounder and ask me for more direction (this includes their asking me to give
>them topics for essays, rather than me giving them the freedom to pick their
>own, a fact which astonishes me!)  Anymore I have found that entering college
>students, unless they place out of freshman comp on the AP exam, need some
>*serious* instruction in how to write...how to think....and how to spell...and
>how to use "its vs it's."

It happens all the time.  I'm sorry you haven't noticed.
>
>Sorry for sounding snide, but I just get disgusted at theory, theory, theory
>and sometimes how divorced it is from REALITY.

You can no more divorce theory from teaching as you can breathing from life.
Even those who profess not to teach according to theory, then teach
according the theory that theory is a waste of time.  My experience, limited
as it apparently is, tells me that those who dislike literacy theory don't
know squat about it and their rhetorical device to halt a discussion they
don't know how to participate in is to declare theory as a poor past time.
>
>Peace,
>-S
And you have a real nice day, too.

Nancy G. Patterson

But a particular point made in many of the posts speaks directly to the comment
below.  Often those who praise and use the 5 paragraph theme juxtapose
it against poor pedagogy. As does the message
below, writers on this list who support the 5 paragraph theme OFTEN
suggest that if one does not teach the rigid/fairly inauthehtic
structure of the 5 paragraph theme, then one says nothing to students
about structure.  Note the poster below says he/she apparently has
asked students to write essays "without giving them any directions in
regard to essay structure or even paragraph structure."  And guess
what? When he/she has done so he/she has found that students
"tend to flounder and ask me for more directions."  Hmmm, let's see,
it seems possible to read that this poster only teaches either the
5 paragraph theme structure or teaches students nothing about
making organizational choices for audiences.  And he/she is surprised
that students who have been carefully drilled in a specific
organizational scheme would ask for more directions when the teacher
is suddenly mute about that important aspect of writing?  Or if the two
techniques are used on different groups of students, this teacher who
realizes that structuring an essay is part of the writing process is
surprised when students ask for directions?

As a search of the NCTE archieves such show (or as we may discuss
again if some would like), the 5 paragraph theme is not the only way
to help students live through the experience of making choices
necessary to produce essays that support their arguments.  In fact,
what's interesting is how the 5 paragraph theme
confines choices, and may, in fact, make the writing decisions easier
for a while . . . .

I agree with a point the poster below offers, students
"need some *serious* instruction in how to write . . .," which, imho,
includes learning to use effectively a rich variety of organizational
choices. Even if the statement below is offered only in jest, though,
to think that the same level of instruction is needed to help student
learn to organize and to help student use "it's and its," and that
teaching the latter requires "serious" instruction, I gotta admit I'm
in need of some definitions for "serious instruction."  Homonym
misspellings are connected to all kinds of actions, including lack of
proofreading, quick proofreading, paying attention to other things
(such as ideas and organization), and many more.  They are hardly the
sign of a lack of critical thinking. To react to them as such may
indicate an inability to switch reading registers or a desire to make
mischief . . . .

From working in some fairly high powered business
settings, I've noticed that as long as those in power in an
organization like what someone is doing (an engineer in one case and a
tax lawyer in another), they aren't overly bothered by the individuals'
lack of skills in writing.  I was once "in" on a report written by a
highly respected Vietmanese engineer with a PhD.  The report was full
of ESL errors, but the document was accepted by all sides in a court
of law without concern for the ESL errors.  However, I've also seen
those in power in an organization go after someone who has minor errors
in their writing IF that person is "on the outs" with the ones in
power. Interestingly, I watched one such shark-feeding headed by a
woman who wrote and spoke more usage errors than did the writer the
group was trashing.  The woman even acknowledged her own short-comings
by saying something like, "Well, I know I don't always get everything
right either, but I'm too busy to dot every i and cross every t.
Apparently the underling who ticked her off didn't, in her mind,
deserve such a luxury.

Interesting when people start claiming that an "it's" used in place of
an "its" stops them from being able to understand a piece . . .

Kim

> I am 1 semester away from graduation with a degree in English, and the 5pe
> is booed, hissed, and generally deleted from the college and post-college
> vocabulary.j
>

Just wait until you are faced with students who cannot organize their
ideas, whose ideas are disjointed and incoherent. Do you hope that their
self-expression and subsequent style develops on its own, or do you give
them a formal structure for expository writing (a 5pe perhaps), and then
allow for a more creative individualized style when they are presented
with a poetry unit or narrative writing?

Honestly, if it wasn't for having learned how to teach the 5pe, I would
have had much greater difficulty organizing my graduate research papers,
all of which received A or A-, and which was outside my field of
expertise. I teach high school English, but my Masters work was in
Environmental Studies. Understanding how the five paragraph essay is a
fundamental way of logically organizing and presenting ideas really helped
me present the information that I researched for all of my final papers.

Anyway, this is my $.02 worth on this frequently discussed thread.

Gary Latman
Harper High
Chicago

For the record, since Bill had sent a 5pe to the list as an argument that
there is a small bit of merit in the form, I chose to counter that argument
by asking questions after each paragraph.  The purpose of the questions was
to show that an effective piece of writing usually is more specific and
better developed than the 5pe allows.

Do I do this on student papers?  Absolutely not.  I don't write on student
papers at all. I don't even grade them.  I talk to kids about their papers,
but I don't put comments on them.  The closest I get to writing actual
comments is sometimes putting sticky notes on student papers.  Those are
more for me so that I know what I want to point out to a student--whether it
is praise or suggestion.

Since Bill had entered the argument, and quite cleverly couched it in the
5pe format, I thought my "teacherly comments" could make a point.  Sorry if
that didn't come across as I intended.

Nancy

I haven't had a chance to check the archives yet, but I am wildly curious
about how you evaluate student writing if you don't "grade" papers.  I use
rubrics, but I feel ultimately pressured to assign a grade to the papers as
well (which usually makes the rubric useless - kids care more about the
"grade" than the assessment).  I read a previous post about commenting on
papers, and I'd love to get a discussion going on comments and grading.  Do
you read all of the papers that your students write?  I can't imagine
having the time to conference with each student individually for every
single paper they write.  This is going to be my fifth year teaching, but I
still haven't come up with a reading/commenting/conferencing/grading system
that works for me (and for my parents and principal, who demand GRADES).

Thanks to anyone who cares to reply,

Maura K.

paking

I score the AP essays, and from what I have seen, the infamous 5PE neither
gets penalized nor rewarded for using that format. Though unscientific to be
sure, and speaking VERY generally, I recall some of the 5PE essays were
awarded "adequate" scores while others were above that, and in indeed, some
were fundamentally deficient. Like any other student writing on demand, it
varies from piece to piece.

John B. Abbott, Jr.
Writing Program/Dept. of English
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey

Leif Fearn

One problem with the debate over 5PE is that we make it a debate.   That is, we paint it as black or white.   You either teach organization via the 5PE or you don't teach organization at all.   This is a false dichotomy.

Here is an alternate route.   Take some well-written, published prose essays  maybe from magazines or editorial pages or from some contemporary books of collected essays.   Analyze the way the whole essay as well as various paragraphs are organized.   You may want students in groups to construct an outline or graphic organizer for that particular essay.   What they will see is a sense of order, but one that does not follow the 5PE format.  If they have already learned 5PE elsewhere, you can compare and contrast what they've learned about 5PE with what they are now discovering about real writing.    (However, let me be clear that learning the 5PE is not a prerequisite and no advantage that I can see).

Then after the analysis, DO NOT have them write an essay following the same outline or graphic organizer as the model piece.   Teach them that their piece must also have a sense of order -- a logical movement and structure from the beginning to the ending.  But they must discover the pattern that fits their purpose, not vice versa.

Over time they will discover that different types of writing tend to have different structures (description, narration, comparison and contrast, classification and division, generalization and example, process, argument, cause and effect, extended definition, etc.), but most writing is mongrel, and not of a single type or structure.   Let them see how it really works.   I sometimes think that when we teach the 5PE we underestimate a student's ability to discover and create more complex structures that can take a piece of writing where it wants to go.

Lind Williams
Provo UT

Nicely said. I agree that we frequently underestimate students' abilities to
understand structure.  And I think your advice to let them discover the
structure of a "real" piece of writing is sensible and very sound
pedagogically (doncha love that word!).

We keep forgetting that our students' lives are saturated with text--from tv
ads to the latest hip hop.  They have a sense of the organization of text
even though they may not be able to necessarily articulate it, or exhibit it
in their own texts.  That's what they need us for--to help them see the
underlying structure of language and ideas.

This is your official Nancy Affirmation for the day.

Nancy G. Patterson

For many on this list, such a lesson cycle is old hat, but for those who
never questioned the 5PE before and have nothing with which to replace it,
this is a viable alternative, and a place to start.

I also agree whole hearedly with this observation you made:

>I sometimes think that when we teach the 5PE we underestimate a
>student's ability to discover and create more complex structures that
>can take a piece of writing where it wants to go.

I have had teachers in my own building tell me that anything other than 5PE
is beyond the students, and that if we don't all consistently teach it the
same way from grade level to grade level, they will not learn how to write.
 One even claimed that if we teach structure as organic, then the kids will
unlearn 5PE and get so confused and messed up they won't know how to write
at all.

I think it is easier to grade 145 essays that all look alike and have the
same number of supports in all the same places and matching outlines, than
it is to grade 145 essays structured around the purpose, point of view, and
audience of the writers.

It is also easier to teach that 5PE structure in the first place.  That
gives  the teacher a false sense ( I woudl add _false_ sense if that is the
only writing allowed) of having done well, and makes for an easier work
load all at the same time.

Here is the way it is generally taught in our building:
 
--All thesis statements should be the last sentence in the first paragraph.
 Did the student correctly do that in the essay?
--All introductions should begin with something broadly related to the
coming thesis and narrow down to the thesis statement.
--No specific data or characters's names from the story should be referred
to until after the thesis.  Easy to check if the student conforms to this.
( Here there is some lack of uniformity though.  Some teachers allow only 3
sentences in the intro. before the thesis, while others require 6-8 before
the thesis.)
--All paragraphs in the body should begin with a topic sentence.  Did the
student have 3 body paragraphs and did each begin with a topic sentence?
No implied topic sentences allowed.

Well, you get the picture, and to me it's pretty bleak.  Most of the
English teachers in my building are not even aware that there is a debate
over the 5PE.  If it a piece doesn't quickly fall into that pattern, they
can't scan it and label it unorganized and poorly written.

Mary Kirkpatrick

Writing, like painting, is a creative activity.  When a student is required to
work using a formula, imagination closes down.

Jean Azemove

However, herein lies part of the danger.   It implies that the 5PE is somehow the "basic" form and all else is merely a variation of it.   I don't think the idea that the 5PE is the "mother of all forms" holds up to careful scrutiny.

While it's true that the 5PE helps students see a basic formula for thesis and supporting ideas, and indeed this is a legitimate construct for organizing one's thinking, I think it is a great leap to then assume that all "essays" are built around this particular construct or are variations of it.

I've heard other arguments that "narrative" is the primary structure, and all else is a variation of it.   I'm not sure I believe that one either, although narrative is much more universal.   My point is that we need to approach the teaching of organization by showing the MANY ways it can be done, not by implying that there is a "master" form with a few variations.

Lind Williams
Provo UT

Leif Fearn
 

The point is that all compositions should have a beginning (including
thesis), middle, and end with some system of unity and coherence and
adequate support. The 5PE is a simple template for making concrete such an
abstract idea. Another would be top bun, cheese, lettuce, hamburger patty,
bottom bun. A hamburger is not an exquisite five-course meal any more than
a 5PE is a sophisticated five-page essay. The first is the lowest common
denominator; the second is the ultimate goal. And students should express
themselves in all genres of writing, not just essays, including--dare I say
it?--business documents, and each can start with a simple model and proceed
to one more complex. I agree that we need a life beyond the 5PE, for if we
never examined anything more sophisticated than a jellyfish, we'd never get
to appreciate the beauty of a horse.

Tom

<<My point is that we need to approach the teaching of organization by showing
the MANY ways it can be done, not by implying that there is a "master" form
with a few variations.>>

Lind, I like what you say and how you say it!

Jean Azemove

     Second, Lind wrote: "I sometimes think that when we teach the 5PE we underestimate a student's ability to discover and create more complex structures that can take a piece of writing where it wants to go."  I'm certainly not going to say that no teacher does what Lind says, but I'm sure that many of us have extremely high expectations of (and respect for) our students. But is the student supposed to discover what it has taken humanity 2000 years to work out? The very idea of a non-narrative, organized essay is a relatively late, and complex development in human civilization. (See Walter Ong's Orality and Literacy.) I am quite sure that many of my students, given a lifetime of over 2,000 years, could work out, all on their own, the concepts of outlining, paragraphing, etc. which we use in expository writing. But unless someone can tell me how to enable these students to live that long, I think we owe it to our students to pass on some of the basic concepts of composition.

Ed V

>I tell my students that a 5pe is just that-a way to organize.  It has one
absolute:  that all writing must have a beginning, middle and end.
---------------------------------
An absolute?  In this era when hypertext is changing the way we think about
text?

I know this may seem like quibbling, but I think we need to be careful about
those absolutes.  Before our eyes, our students are engaging with text that
does not have an identifiable beginning, middle, and end.  Many students are
now writing hypertext documents, either in a school setting or in the dim
glow of their home computers.  It's very easy to think that hypertext won't
have an effect on your teaching, but how many of you were banging away on a
computer keyboard 10 years ago?  Whether we think this change in how we look
at text is good or bad or something in between, it's coming.  For many of
our students, it's already here.

If we continue to think of text as linear, then we will be caught in the
propeller wash of the hypertext search engines.

Nancy G. Patterson

Leif Fearn

Jean Azemove

Leif Fearn

I'll share with you a quotation from "Writer's Inc: A Guide to Writing,
Thinking, & Learning":
------------------------------------------------------------
The Creative Essay [versus The Traditional Essay]

Rudy wrote a paper about a critical international issue: world hunger. The
fact that there are so many starving people in the world today particularly
disturbs him. His paper specifically addresses the causes of hunger in
Africa. This is his thesis, but it isn't proposed or developed in the
traditional way.

Rudy decides that the most efective way to develop his thesis is to tell
the story of a young boy named Kamal (not a real person) who is dying of
starvation. He develops Kamal's story so that it eventually becomes the
story of hunger in all of Africa. His closing ideas offer some alarming
statistics followed by a question addressed to the readers. Rudy's paper is
clear, logical, and dramatic--a creative and innovative composition.

At first glance these two papers seem to have little in common. But they
are both essays, cause and effect essays as a matter of fact. They
illustrate the wide range of writings that fall under the heading of the
essay. Sarah's paper is a good example of the traditional essay
(informative, straightforward, and tightly organized); whereas Rudy's paper
is a good example of a creative essay (informative, organized, and
original).
-----------------------------------------------------------

The 5PE is just one traditional model, and I see nothing wrong with
students using it as a starting point. But I don't believe it's the only
model nor that it needs to be repeated over and over throughout grades 9-12.

Students need to evolve to longer, more sophisticated essays, and teachers
need the courage and professionalism to assign them and evaluate them and
grade them. Professional writers do not write 5PEs.

Of course, essay writing shoud not be the only type of writing a student does.

Let's consider the full range (also borrowed from "Writer's Inc"):

PERSONAL WRITING (journals, logs, diaries, free writing, clustering,
listing, informal essays and and narratives, brainstorming, reminiscences)

FUNCTIONAL WRITING (business letters and memos, letters of application,
appreciation, etc., resumes, contracts, proposals, reports, invitations)

CREATIVE WRITING (poems, myths, plays, stories, anecdotes, sketches,
essays, letters, songs, jokes, parodies, plays, teleplays)

EXPOSITORY WRITING (reports, reviews, letters, research papers, essays,
news stories, interviews, instructions, manuals)

PERSUASIVE WRITING (editorials, letters, cartoons, research papers, essays,
advertisements, slogans, pamphlets, petitions, commercials)

The traditional expository essay is perhaps overused, especially the 5PE.

I'd like to see students write longer, more sophisticated, meatier papers
that they revise multiple times over the course of a marking period or
semester. Revision and editing is much easier for those with access to a
computer since it involves on-screen changes, not copying it over from
scratch.

Shorter writing could be selected from the lists above.

Tom

Leif Fearn

Maybe we know how; maybe we don't.

Maybe we don't have the time or desire to read, evaluate, and grade other,
longer papers in addition to research papers when we have such a
literature-laden curriculum to "cover."

Maybe we need training in how to teach and evaluate other types of writing.

Maybe we need some incentives--beyond professionalism and self-esteem--to
do more, to do it differently, to do it better. ("Why should I bust my
chops with all those papers to read and grade when you assign only one
paper per marking period, merely write a letter grade on it, nothing else,
and you, because of your degree and the number of acculumated years of
sitting behind your desk, are earning much more money than I am? Don't I
deserve a life after the dismissal bell, too?")

Maybe we need to help rewrite the curriculum to include other such writing.

Maybe we need higher-ups to tell us we have to do it, or else.

Teaching compostion is only one piece of the pie. Maybe it needs to be a
bigger piece. Maybe a slice needs to be served with all entrees, not just
saved for dessert.

Maybe teachers themselves need to spend more time writing--and in a variety
of genres--to be better teachers of writing themselves.

"Covering content" should be something of concern for a cat in a litterbox,
not an educator in a classroom.
 

Tom

I don't know what "we" is being discussed here, but plenty of folks
know how to teach other organizational schemes besides the five
paragraph theme structure, although I'll give you that the schemes
aren't as "precise" or false as the 5 paragraph theme.

Two quick common modes to consider include the narrative scheme (time
sequence) and descriptive (parts to explain whole). These can be
taught at levels as young as you want to go.  One way is to make sure
students in a given assignment have had time to explore ideas and
think though the requirements of the assignment (who is being written
to, what does that audience need to hear, why is the writing being
done, etc.).

Next they can freewrite and hunt for synthesis, do some
other synthesizing activity, or try to get their ideas stated in a
nutshell version--a version which can serve as a focus statement for
the paper or just help the writer maintain a sense of focus. Then,
using the focus statement as a guide, the students can develop a list
of ideas they'd would need to share to make the promise of their focus
statement a reality for their audiences.  Students can
practice/experiment whether they'd want to offer the ideas in a
narrative fashion (steps/steps in time) or a descriptive (determine
the parts needed to explain the whole experience they can't get down
on paper).

Finally, the students can develop drafts trying to follow
their organizational plan.  Of course, in between times, they should
have discussed their decisions--in all phases--with classmates,
teachers, the principal, the librarian, pals, family, etc.

This approach is more time-consuming, probably, than is the teaching
of the five paragraph theme, but it involves strategies and choices
based on audience, purpose, and ideas, not the following of a
time-honored "basic" scheme (whatever that is). Teachers may have to
talk with some students, maybe a lot, about transitions, but many will
discuss those on their own or determine the need for them on their
own. For those who don't, a few authentic readings will help them
understand that communication/writing principle.

And when the narrative and descriptive modes have been played
with/experienced, then other modes can be introduced, including
compare/contrast, problem solving/reporting or the more complex/yet
simpler what-do-you-need-to-tell-your-readers plan, which doesn't
impose an organizational mode but demands one based on the focus
statement.

And there are many more ways to teach organization, transition,
development, coherence, and critical thinking without the 5 paragraph
theme.  A principle to follow may be to teach students to think
through their writing process, making choices about organization (an
other points), not just trying to fill in someone else's determined
structure.

Kim Ballard

Leif Fearn
 

Leif,
Yea, and the good news is lots of teachers I know do the same thing I
outlined. I don't think it's unrealistic to hope that students might get
five teachers in a row who know how to teach writing rather than
formulas. The kicker is whether students will get five in a row who
can feel confident about having such time for student growth . . .
 

Kim Ballard

>Nancy said...
>>Do I do this on student papers?  Absolutely not.  I don't write on student
>>papers at all. I don't even grade them.  I talk to kids about their papers,
>>but I don't put comments on them.  The closest I get to writing actual
>>comments is sometimes putting sticky notes on student papers.  Those are
>>more for me so that I know what I want to point out to a student--whether it
>>is praise or suggestion.

I use rubrics, but I feel ultimately pressured to assign a grade to the papers as
>well (which usually makes the rubric useless - kids care more about the
>"grade" than the assessment).
>Maura K.

Yes, in my senior classes, both regular and AP, I've found that they want to
know the "grade" more than "listen" to my comments about their papers,
regardless of "how" I'm making those comments.  Here are a few ideas I've
incorporated:

Before I hand out the papers, I put a few general comments on the overhead
about "most common mistakes" in this particular assignment.  Then we work
through a few "student errors"  (cleverly disguised) direct from their
papers.  They are required to copy these samples and corrections.

Then I hand out their papers, sans rubric.  They have a few minutes to go
through their papers, see the comments, record their common errors, ask me
to interpret any post-midnight handwriting atrocities.  In a contrasting
color of ink, highliter, etc, they make changes to their papers as they see
fit, and make notes about other editing needed in the next step.

Then I hand out the rubrics.  The rubric has the grade at the top or bottom,
other feedback specific to the assignment, and sometimes a note from me
about what I liked most or found needs the most attention in their writing
development.  They record the grade, give me back the rubric, take the paper
home or file it for another class day, and it stands ready for revision.

Whether I do this "whole group", small groups, or in conference, I try to
follow this pattern of discussion.
Maybe this will help them listen to your comments more patiently.

Edna Earney