Reflecting on Scott

Reflective writing does not depend on an “inner voice”, says Scott.  This means that the act of reflecting on one’s work is not as spontaneous or genuine as one may think.  But just because reflective writing is not a “natural” act does not mean that it is worthless, no matter how skittish people may be around it.

People tend to make qualitative comments on their writing, saying this piece of writing was good, and this piece was bad.  Reflective writing gets away from this superficiality, but introduces another one.  According to the students that Scott interviewed, what they felt about their writing was not what they wrote in their comments.

This could be because of the “bureaucracy” Scott describes as surrounding reflective writing in the Kentucky school system, rather than a commentary on reflective writing, itself.  This article kind of left me on the fence about the validity and usefulness of reflective comments.

One thought to “Reflecting on Scott”

  1. Was this article like a case study of the Kentucky school systems, or was he using that to make a larger point? My opinion of reflective writing was not really swayed by any of these articles, except that I was amazed by how intensely analyzed the concept of “reflective writing” was written about.

Leave a Reply