In the Approaches to Reading Texts questionnaire, explored in 5.4.1, there had been a mixed response to the idea of writing for pleasure. I was keen to explore this question further with regard to classroom practice and the opportunity arose during an English PGCE University Subject Conference in March 2014, which took creative writing as its focus. The question posed at the conference was: ‘Do teachers of writing need to be writers themselves?’ The open questionnaire, which invited narrative responses, was written by a colleague and completed by student teachers from all the PGCE English groups. I have focused on the respondents from my group and it must be noted that these respondents were all following the University-based PGCE route as their School Direct counterparts were involved in school placements at this point in the course. For further information about the sample please see 4.2.1 Part One: Research Sample Data Set 4, p.117-118. All names have been changed to preserve anonymity.
The group were asked when they had last written creatively. Only two wrote regularly, one posting stories on his blog and one writing stories for children and writing and performing songs. One had been a journalist before starting the PGCE. The remaining seven had last written creatively at school, college or university, or were occasional, ‘private’ writers. All the respondents said they had enjoyed writing poetry and stories as children but for the majority, this had clearly not
170
continued. Some discussed ideas they had had for personal writing and projects they might start but not finish because: ‘most of the time I would lose confidence half way through, feeling that my work simply wasn’t good enough’. Others described private and tentative writing projects. One student mentioned taking a creative writing module at university and finding it too prescriptive and restrictive: ‘Any experimentation with language was shot down!’ Three recognised that they made conscious choices not to do further creative writing, one choosing literature modules and one feeling that she was reliant on ‘structured writing’. One student teacher, Louise, discussed her pleasure in creative writing when she was at school and how she had started a creative writing club for Year 7 pupils when working as a teaching assistant.
The respondents were asked if an English teacher who writes themselves, gains insights into helping pupils to write well. This question split the respondents with seven in agreement, although with varying degrees of enthusiasm and commitment. Although there was consensus about the need to have knowledge of the writing process, three respondents argued that it was not necessary for an English teacher to write creatively for them to be able to teach this process effectively. Becky noted:
Just because you write, doesn’t necessarily mean you are a better teacher of writing.
Nicola explored this point further:
Just because a person can’t write very well doesn’t mean they can’t identify what makes a good piece of writing and pass that knowledge on to the pupils.
Interestingly, Louise, who had set up a creative writing club when she was working as a teaching assistant, commented:
171
I think the role of the English teacher is to encourage any aspect of the subject whole-heartedly, but as long as you understand the skills needed and the difficulties pupils may face through past experiences perhaps, you don’t have an obligation to write as such.
In these responses there is a suggestion that the onus is on the teacher to deliver the skills not to construct learning as a negotiated domain with her pupils to develop a shared understanding of what those skills might entail.
At the other end of the spectrum there was an enthusiastic affirmation of the idea that English teachers should write creatively. This was most noticeable from the two students who were already regular writers but there were thoughtful contributions from all who provided a positive response. Harry’s comment is interesting:
I think that teachers should write creatively because it is a good way to reflect on your own weaknesses as a writer and I also think it gives you an introspective view of yourself and your feelings if you write honestly.
I had been used to hearing about the redemptive and transformative qualities of reading but this was the first time the debate had centred on the benefits of writing outside the development of curriculum skills. Harry’s comments echo Grainger’s (2005:84) study which found that:
Teachers found their outer voices through choosing to converse with their inner voices. They appeared to be listening to themselves, beginning to hear what they had to say and valuing the process of reflective introspection and connection.
172
It also puts you in the position of the pupil and how they may feel about writing creatively, e.g. apprehensive, nervous, not confident, embarrassed about sharing their feelings.
This is a very different approach to teacher subject knowledge to the one espoused earlier by Nicola, that to be able to identify the features of a good piece of writing means that you can pass that knowledge on to pupils. Nicola is identifying subject knowledge as something external, concrete and quantifiable that can be ‘passed on’. For Harry, this knowledge is more internal and fluid, and, importantly, affective. It connects to his understanding of his development, in this case, as a writer. John (a published writer) also begins to explore this internal aspect of subject knowledge development in his ringing endorsement of teachers as writers:
I believe you must be capable of practising what you preach; if you do not enjoy writing, you won’t enjoy teaching writing. Your enthusiasm and passion will leak into your teaching of the subject, and if you write you will know the terror of writer’s block and the frustration of having an idea yet being unable to put it on the page. By being a writer yourself, it adds significant scope, a level of individual understanding, when a child says they cannot write it allows a deeper insight into their issues.
These responses are interesting for the somewhat polarised views, which connect with personal beliefs about English. For Nicola, Aysha and Becky, a view of English emerges that has literature at its core and Aysha states: ‘I’d definitely say I was more accomplished at reading rather than writing.’
There is also a view emerging that writing is something personal and private which shouldn’t have to be shared. Cassie perhaps identifies one of the issues when she says that sharing her writing would be daunting initially as it is such a personal task. She goes on to say:
173
This is a problem pupils face because there is so much to remember when writing – grammar, vocabulary, punctuation, structure of work, character, setting etc. It’s a sense of being judged and not meeting the cut of what a good written piece is.
For these student teachers, it seems that the issues about writing and sharing it publically are exactly the same for them as for their pupils. Aysha comments that:
Sometimes as a teacher it is difficult to be creative in our writing because we focus so much on the technical elements so it takes some enjoyment away.
There is also a marked difference to the confident and enthusiastic subject discourse on reading in 5.4.1.
There is much to be explored here in terms of the opportunities that can be opened up in the PGCE year to allow student teachers to experiment with writing in secure and structured environments. What emerges from the mixed responses is that there are some who are willing to engage in personal and professional learning that offers practical and productive insights into the wider concerns of the subject. However, others who feel less confident in this area, are resistant and happier to rely on ‘policy knowledge: a model of knowledge that excludes knowledge as a negotiated domain, and thereby also excludes the teacher (and indeed the student) as being active in the construction of knowledge’ (Brindley, 2015:46). Dymoke (2011:149) recognises that these are issues of confidence and considers the potential of the PGCE to provide structured support in engendering student teachers’ ‘writing voice’.
Ball (2003:226) explores Lyotard’s (1984:4) argument that the commodification of knowledge involves ‘not simply a different evaluation of knowledge, but fundamental changes in the relationships between the learner, learning and knowledge, resulting in “a thorough exteriorization of knowledge”’.
174
I wondered how far the classroom learning environment itself contributed to the exteriorization of knowledge? Schools are pressured places where results matter and to deviate from the norm means to take risks, and risks might jeopardise those results. That is one argument but another might be that both pupils’ and teachers’ expectations of what happens in an English classroom also plays a part. A consideration of the relationship between learner, learning, knowledge and learning space led me and my colleagues to explore developing writing skills in museums and galleries.
5.4.3 Challenge and invigoration in out of school contexts: Art Gallery Subject