Searching for Clarity through the Authentic Voice
Michelle Gerrity
Professional Development School Inquiry Paper
State College Area School District / Penn State University
May 27, 2011
Gerrity 2
Introduction:
“At its best, writing (or composing) is a way of seeing and responding to our universe. It’s how
we make sense of what’s going on around us: We compose our ideas and our universe, and we
do so in language” (Risser 2-3).
Writing is an invaluable skill for success in today’s society. We write for myriad
reasons, and we are often judged on what we write and how we write it. As such, writing can be
an extension of ourselves—a part of our personality captured on the page. This personal quality
of writing can be thought of as a writer’s style, energy, or even attitude; however, it is often
called a writer’s voice. What causes us to allow our personalities, or voices, to leak onto the
written page? What are the aspects that make up written voice? What is the benefit of writing
with voice? Is voice an aspect of writing that can be taught?
These are just a few of the questions I faced during my first year of co-teaching as an
intern at State College Area High School. During my internship, which ran from August 2010 to
June 2011, I collaborated with three different teachers to teach four different ninth grade English
classes for the entirety of the school year. Three of these four classes were designated by the
State College Area School District as “CTI,” or Collaborative Teaching Initiative, classes. CTI
classes are comprised of a careful mix of regular education students, special education students,
and reading support students. Two teachers collaborate to deliver differentiated instruction that
meets all student needs in CTI classes of 21 students or fewer. It is around these CTI classes that
my questions about writing emerged.
As the school year progressed, I learned that my students’ writing abilities ranged from
those students who could easily and clearly explain their thoughts to those who struggled to
express their thoughts in a comprehensible sentence. An issue of clarity in my students’ writing
Gerrity 3
arose in the different types of writing my students produced. For example, when reading my
students’ essays, I often could not decipher what they were trying to say. When I read their
journals, on the other hand, not only could I understand their ideas, but I also could almost hear
my students speaking. I was intrigued both by how clear their journal writing was and by how
much of their personality was captured in their writing. After identifying this personal quality of
writing as “authentic voice,” I began to wonder about the connection between clarity and voice
in my students’ work.
The greatest difference in clarity that I noticed in my students’ writing was between their
lively and clear journal writing and their relatively muddled essay writing. I wondered: How is it
that the same student who struggled to explain how the personality traits of Mercutio made him a
significant character in Romeo and Juliet could easily state his views on how wealth and social
class affect human happiness? Both topics are complex, but the quality of writing produced for
each was vastly different.
For example, below is an excerpt from the body of the aforementioned essay, written by
George*, one of my students:
Benvolio is a honest person there are many reasons why Benvolio is very honest
for one example he tells the Prince how a small town fight happens in Verona and
how everyone was involved in that fight. Another example is that when Mercutio
gets killed by Tybalt and then Romeo kills Tybalt, Benvolio tells that Tybalt
killed Mercutio but even tells that Romeo killed Tybalt. He could’ve lied and said
Mercutio and Tybalt killed each other during the fight. This shows he’s honest to
every one even if he has to tell the truth on his friends and family but he also tells
*In the interest of protecting students’ identities, all students’ names in this essay are
pseudonyms.
Gerrity 4
Romeo to run away before Prince Escslus came to punish him which proves he’s
a good friend and cares.
George’s essay is confusing and difficult to read. Aside from a general lack of
punctuation, his writing is repetitive and wordy. What should be the first two sentences—though
they are part of one long run-on sentence—unnecessarily repeat the same idea: Benvolio is
honest. George then proceeds to back up this claim with evidence from the text. This next
sentence (“for one example… that fight.”) is also circumlocutory and lacks the syntactical
arrangement necessary to create a clear emphasis on the purpose of mentioning this evidence.
He then attempts to explain a different piece of evidence (“Another example… killed Tybalt.”),
but his writing becomes even more convoluted than before. Here, as above, it seems a
combination of repetition, a confusing word arrangement, and a lack of precise verbs clouds
George’s writing and prevents a clear meaning from emerging. These aspects of his writing in
the remainder of this excerpt continue to make his writing unclear and his voice absent.
In contrast to the convoluted writing above, George writes with more clarity in his
journal entry for the novel, The Outsiders. The journal prompt asks: “Do social class and wealth
affect happiness? Why or why not?” Below is an excerpt of George’s response:
No i don't think wealth effects happiness because I just don't think it does I have
some friends who aren't rich and they have as much as fun as anyone else does. I
do think social class matters though cause there are some kids who get made fun
of cause they don’t talk or hangout with anyone. I see kids who do have money
and don’t have many friends most the time cause they think there better. I'm
known in this school so I have a lot of people to talk to and to hang out with. Also
there are kids excluded for not having as much money because or cause of the
Gerrity 5
clothes they wore. Also a down of being rich is that they always want to do
something that not everyone can waste money on.
In his journal entry, George makes mistakes similar to those in his essay in punctuation,
capitalization, misused or misspelled words, and run-on sentences. However, his writing is
much clearer and more direct; the repetition, wordiness, and confusing word arrangement that
inundated his essay are not present in his journal. While the verbs he uses may not be the most
precise, they convey a clear meaning in context. Interestingly, George does not specifically
explain his definition of “wealth” or “social class,” but he seems to make clear that he believes
that having money itself does not impact happiness; the perceived social class a person belongs
to due to the money they have, however, can impact happiness. The grammatical errors he
makes in his journal and his essay remain the same, but the quality of his writing—the ability of
his written words to quickly, efficiently, and clearly convey a generally unquestionable
meaning—is better in his journal than it is in his essay.
What, then, causes the same student writer to produce quality writing that contains a clear
and authentic voice on one assignment and not on another? In an attempt to discover the answer
to this question, I turned to the experts of written voice.
Authentic Voice in Writing:
Steve Peha claims that one of the many aspects of good writing is “individual and
appropriate voice.” He defines voice as “the expression of your individual personality through
words” (Peha). He says it is “how your writing feels to someone when they read it” (Peha).
Such voice emerges, according to Peha, when the writer cares about the topic, writes with strong
Gerrity 6
feelings and honest statements, appears to be authentic and original, shows a well developed
personality, and displays an appropriate tone for audience and purpose.
Students most likely care about a topic if they write about something that relates to their
lives and that they have strong opinions about, which they can support with many details (Peha).
Teachers and other readers will be able to identify these strong opinions and lifelike details, as
well as the confident, lifelike voice that arises through them. Similarly, an additional aspect of
voice occurs when the writer writes with strong feelings and honest statements. Because our
emotions comprise so much of what makes us individuals, showing emotion in our writing helps
to show our individual voice. The quality of honesty comes through in writing when it appears
that the writer appears to genuinely believe what he or she is writing (Peha).
Authenticity and originality are also qualities of voice according to Peha. When writing
sounds like no one else but the writer could have written it, and when it consistently sounds “as
though it was written by a real person,” it is authentic and original, and therefore contains the
voice of the original writer (Peha). These qualities are similar to another quality of voice: a well
developed personality. When writing has a strong voice, Peha maintains, the reader feels as
though he is “getting to know the person who wrote it.” The personality that a writer shows
through his or her voice should be “well defined and successfully developed” (Peha).
The final quality of a strong voice, according to Peha, is appropriate tone for audience
and purpose. He maintains that the voice that a writer chooses for his or her writing must match
both the reason for writing as well as the person or people a writer is addressing.
While Peha includes the several aspects of voice under one umbrella term, Peter Elbow
breaks down the qualities of voice in a different manner by explaining several distinct types of
voice. He promotes voice as “one of the main forces that draws us into texts. We often give
Gerrity 7
other explanations for what we like (‘clarity,’ ‘style,’ ‘energy,’ ‘sublimity,’ ‘reach’—even truth),
but I think it’s often one sort of voice or another” (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”). According to
Elbow, the three main categories of voice that encapsulate these “other explanations” are audible
voice, dramatic voice, and one’s own voice (“Pleasures of Voices”).
Audible voice is the quality of a text to “make us hear someone’s voice” (Elbow,
“Pleasures of Voices”). Elbow claims: “Texts with audible voice give us the sense of a sound
coming up from the page by itself; and they seem to give us energy rather than requiring energy
of us” (“Pleasures of Voices”). He argues that “lifeless or tangled writing” is more often than
not “inaudible prose” (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
Dramatic voice, Elbow says, tells the reader “what kind of person is talking” in a text
(“Pleasures of Voices”). This occurs when readers feel they can “hear someone’s character or
personality in the way she speaks” (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
The third category, according to Elbow, is further split into three subcategories: “One’s
own voice as a distinctive, recognizable voice,” “One’s own voice as ‘having the authority to
speak,’” and “One’s own voice as ‘authentic voice’ or resonance” (“Pleasures of Voices”).
Similar to audible voice, “‘Distinctive, recognizable’ voice is sometimes used in a
narrower sense to mean that the writer’s textual voice resembles her speaking voice” (Elbow,
“Pleasures of Voices”). However, this type of voice, while having an audible quality, is different
from audible voice in that it is not just any spoken voice; it is that of the writer. Additionally,
distinctive voice is not necessarily recognizable only as a writer’s speaking voice. It can also
mean a specific voice that an author crafts that can be recognized by readers throughout many
pieces of that author’s work; this voice is not necessarily one and the same with the author’s
actual speaking voice (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
Gerrity 8
One’s voice as having the authority to speak is based in part on the confidence and surety
of the writer’s statements about a topic (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”). Elbow claims, “When
someone has no voice in this sense, he may experience himself as having lots to say but unable
to say it” (“Pleasures of Voices”). Additionally, writers sometimes appear “voiceless” in this
respect because they do not have “‘the lingo,’” or the “accepted voice or discourse of the
community” necessary to write about their topic (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”). Nonetheless,
this type of voice ultimately emerges when writers feel “authority or trust in [themselves]”
(Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”). Students, then, who sometimes lack the confidence to make
bold statements in their writing, often lack authoritative voice, thereby “undermin[ing] their
writing,” according to Elbow (“Pleasures of Voices”). He states that this tendency of students
“is not surprising when we reflect that students are not accustomed to writing to communicate
what they know to someone who doesn’t know it, but rather as a way to be tested for whether
they know what the reader-teacher already knows” (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
One’s own voice as authentic voice is, according to Elbow, “the most controversial
dimension of voice in texts” because “To talk about the relationship of the text to the real author
is to violate the intentional fallacy” (“Pleasures of Voices”). Elbow explains that for any text,
two authors exist: “the implied author as it were in the text and the actual historical author as it
were behind the text” (“Pleasures of Voices”). However, readers have the choice to emphasize
either the real author or the implied author, thereby attending to different dimensions of the text.
New Critics, on the other hand, say that it is futile to attempt to talk about the “real” author,
because to do so would be to make unfounded assumptions. The New Critic viewpoint is as
follows: “it is a fallacy even to try to talk about the real author at all because such talk is about
Gerrity 9
something we can never know: we have contact only with what’s in the text, we can never have
contact with what’s behind the text” (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
However, Elbow contends: “just because the real author and her intention are invisible,
that doesn’t mean they are unknowable” (“Pleasures of Voices”). Furthermore, when working
with students, particularly students who are learning to write, teachers often violate the
intentional fallacy. Rather than treating student writing as “complete,” they allow themselves to
think of a text as “incomplete” in order to make guesses about the author’s intentions (Elbow,
“Pleasures of Voices”). In effect, teachers talk about such texts as those “in which real authors
did not achieve their intention but in which we [teachers], if we’re good readers, can sense those
intentions” (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”). Being able to sense those intentions and help
student writers to fully realize them is essential to good teaching; otherwise, the teacher’s advice
to student writers would be misguided (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
Additionally, Elbow claims that we often naturally read texts for authentic or resonant
voice, “namely to sense not only how it fits us but to sense how it relates to the person producing
it. Obviously we can only do this if we hear a lot of discourse by that person” (“Pleasures of
Voices”). Teachers have the fortunate opportunity to hear the discourse of their student writers
on a regular basis.
Elbow argues that voice should be fostered from the early stages of learning to write.
Voice is a unique aspect of writing in that producing it has little to do with good thinking or the
conventions of writing (Elbow, “Voice as a Lightning Rod”). As such, it is a part of writing that
all students can tap into almost as soon as they learn to write. Indeed, children often seem to
naturally use voice in their writing: “Unskilled and illiterate and child writers are less likely to
Gerrity 10
conform to all the literacy conventions that have the effect of removing traces of the oral from
writing” (Elbow, “Voice as a Lightning Rod”).
Elbow maintains that encouraging students to use voice in their writing is necessary to
their development as writers. In order for students to get better at writing, they must have some
desire to practice and improve their writing. One way to encourage this desire in students is to
allow them to experience some success in writing through voice, which gives students “the
experience of writing something that captures the attention and interest of readers [and] the
experience of pleasure at having written something that readers actually want to read” (Elbow,
“Voice as a Lightning Rod”). If we encourage the use of voice in student writing from the start,
students are more likely to experience this type of success and, therefore, are more likely to
enjoy writing and want to get better at it: “Students can get voice in their writing before they get
any better at thinking or more skilled with the conventions” (Elbow, “Voice as a Lightning
Rod”). Whether a beginning writer’s voice is “childish [and] naïve” or “loud [and] vexatious,” it
can later be used to show “sophisticated, careful, critical and thinking” (Elbow, “Voice as a
Lightning Rod”).
In his “Crafting Authentic Voice,” Tom Romano’s students define authentic voice as
“when the voice in the writing matches the personality of the writer” and as when readers
encounter an author’s words and hear the author talking to them (5). Romano’s students appear
to be speaking of Elbow’s category of resonant voice. Because they were able to hear Romano
speak on a regular basis, they were familiar with his distinctive speaking voice, and they “heard”
that speaking voice in his text, just as Elbow claims teachers can “hear” their students resonant
voices in their work because they are first familiar with their speaking voices.
Gerrity 11
Taking a different approach to voice from Elbow, Romano argues that authentic voice in
writing can be intentionally crafted and even taught (“Crafting” 5). Choosing precise verbs,
eliminating unnecessary adverbs, creating tension, arranging words and punctuation to create
tone and emphasis, formatting the written page to create a desired look, strategically placing
language to create rhythm, and choosing specific words to create emphasis and inflection are all
ways in which Romano claims to consciously form his own authentic voice (“Crafting” 6-8).
Romano himself defines voice as “the writer’s presence on the page” and “the human
quality of written language that is directly related to its sibling, the spoken word” (“Writing” 50).
Romano also acknowledges the many different types of written voices that exist, though in a
different way than Elbow does so. Romano describes the many types of voices he has read,
spanning from “raucous and spirited” voices, to those that are “windy and cluttered with
wordiness and qualifications,” and everything in between (“Writing” 51). He says voices that
are too “abstractly intellectual and fraught with jargon” can lead to “impenetrable” writing, while
voices “riddled with spelling aberrations, nonstandard usage, and incorrect punctuation” can
result in an “unmistakable” meaning of the words and an “undeniable” presence of the writer
(Romano, “Writing” 51).
While Romano believes that “written voices can express our identities,” he also believes
that these voices “can develop and change” (“Writing” 55). Like Elbow, who describes the
existence of “dramatic voice,” Romano claims that “We can even wear a mask and write in a
voice not our own” (“Writing” 55). Both Elbow and Romano realize the creative implications of
a writer in constructing a narrator or an implied author for their text. They also both realize the
necessity of creating a safe and trusting atmosphere in the classroom in which students may feel
comfortable enough to fully engage in writing, to courageously take risks, and to trust
Gerrity 12
themselves enough to allow their authentic voice into their writing (Elbow, “Voice as a
Lightning Rod”; Romano, “Writing” 55).
Essays and Difficulties in Voice:
After learning about voice in writing, I began to wonder how students can be taught to
write with voice, and how different types of writing assignments help to foster authentic voice. I
took a closer look at the writing assignments my students had completed.
My co-teacher and I worked with our students on several minor writing assignments
before we assigned our first substantial writing assignment of the year: the Romeo and Juliet
character analysis essay. This assignment required students to choose a character from William
Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, think of three personality traits of that character, and write a
thesis statement that included those three traits and how they made the character significant in
the play. Then, in a five paragraph essay, students were to support their theses, giving examples
and evidence from the play.
However, the character analysis essay, as my mentor teacher originally designed it, did
not require students to have thesis statements in their essays. It merely asked students to choose
a character from the play and write about three personality traits of that character. When I
learned this, I did not understand how students could write an essay without the focus of a thesis,
and so, I volunteered to teach students how to write a thesis statement so that they could include
them in their essays. Unfortunately, what I did not understand or consider at the time was how
thesis statements can help or hinder an authentic voice. A thesis statement provides the focus of
an essay, and the writer’s knowledge of, understanding of, interest in, and confidence in the
topic—or focus—of their writing is essential to producing authentic voice. Whether or not
Gerrity 13
writers are interested in and have a strong understanding and opinions about their thesis
statements directly affects their inclination to write with voice.
Because students had already begin the assignment when I discussed thesis statements
with my mentor, by the time I was able to introduce the idea of thesis statements, students had
already chosen the character they wanted to write about as well as the personality traits that they
wanted to focus on for that character. For this reason, I chose to mold the thesis statement I
would teach around these ideas. The thesis statements I instructed students to write therefore
required the following three criteria: 1) a character from Romeo and Juliet, 2) three personality
traits of that character, and 3) how those three personality traits make that character significant in
the play. I spent a class period explaining thesis statements to my students and having them
write their own.
This produced many similar, though fairly complex thesis statements, such as: “Mercutio,
one of the main characters in the play Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare, is funny and
clever, but his ignorance led people to despise him,” or “Romeo’s character traits of being
romantic, loyal, and moody all lead him to death in the end.” While these thesis statements do
not exhibit distinctive voice, they are clearly written and authoritative.
After writing their thesis statements, students planned out their essays in the typical 5
paragraph essay style. The first paragraph was the introduction. The second paragraph
addressed the first personality trait listed in the thesis statement and how it makes the character
significant. Paragraphs three and four addressed the next two personality traits in similar
fashion, and the final paragraph consisted of the conclusion.
My co-teacher and I spent much time scaffolding this writing assignment. Students were
given several days in class to write their essays, and interspersed throughout their work days, I
Gerrity 14
taught several mini-lessons, addressing whatever part of the essay that most students were
writing at the time. In my mini-lessons, I explained and modeled the different parts of an
essay—such as the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion—and my students and I wrote
example paragraphs together as a class. Students completed worksheets that coached them
through how to write a thesis statement and an introduction. Additionally, students were given
time in class to revise and edit their essays, and they completed peer-editing workshops in which
they read their peers’ essays and looked for certain aspects of the assignment using a checklist.
Though my co-teacher and I spent considerable time and effort in class trying to coach
our students through writing the character analysis essay, we never addressed the aspect of voice
in our students’ essays. Because of this, when the essays were finally due and it was time for my
co-teacher and I to read and grade them, the products we received were confusing, repetitive,
filled with grammatical errors, and largely lacking voice. The following thesis statements and
essay excerpts demonstrate this lack of clarity and voice in my students’ essays.
Louis wrote his character analysis essay about Mercuito. His thesis statement is as
follows: “Mercutio, one of the main characters in the play Romeo and Juliet by William
Shakespeare, is funny and clever, but his ignorance led people to despise him.” This student’s
thesis statement is somewhat complex, and it is written clearly and with authority about the
topic. His essay, however, is repetitive and confusing:
One of Mercuito’s personality traits is that he is funny. He shows that he is funny
because he makes good jokes and is always making jokes and always being
funny. He can always find new jokes and is able to make jokes up on the spot.
He can also always find new ways to be funny and can always find new jokes.
Gerrity 15
In the above excerpt, Louis repeats the same idea several times in four sentences, using
the word “funny” four times and the word “jokes” five times. His writing is missing several of
the aspects of voice that Romano uses to craft voice. For example, his verb choices are not
precise; he frequently uses nonspecific “to be” verbs that fail to create a vivid image in the
reader’s mind, and the repetitive arrangement of his words and ideas create a lack of tone,
tension, and emphasis.
Louis’s lack of voice here could be caused by his lack of interest in the topic at hand.
According to Peha, engagement in writing and interesting in the topic at hand are crucial to
writing with voice. Additionally, Louis may feel as though he does not understand the play very
well and so does not have the authority to speak about the topic. This, too, can cause any essay
to lack voice (Elbow, “Pleasures of Voices”).
George wrote about Benvolio in his character analysis essay. Below is his opening
paragraph:
Benvolio, from the play Romeo and Juliet written by William Shakespeare,
Benvolio is trustworthy, sympathetic, and a peacemaker. These are the
characteristics every one wants a friend to have. Having these characteristics is a
good thing in life because Benvolio always make good decisions.
George’s thesis statement is difficult to decipher. I am unsure if his focus is that Benvolio’s
characteristics make him a desirable friend or if they allow him to make good decisions. His
writing here begins with a run-on sentence, which causes some repetition—he need only state
Benvolio as the subject of his sentence once for it to clearly make sense. This repetition
continues as he arranges his sentences in an unnecessarily wordy manner. The ideas in his last
two sentences can be combined into one, more direct, sentence: “Every friend should have these
Gerrity 16
characteristics because they result in good decisions, like those Benvolio makes throughout the
play.” However, a clue as to why George’s writing is indirect and repetitive here can be found in
his second sentence: “These are characteristics every one wants a friend to have.” The use of the
passive voice here makes George’s writing less direct than it can be. Additionally, George says
“every one” wants their friends to have these characteristics, indicating that he does not feel he
has the authority to say, “Every friend needs these characteristics” or any otherwise boldly direct
declaration about this topic. The lack of authority and strong feelings about the topic, paired
with grammatical and syntactical choices that result in repetition and wordiness, causes a lack of
voice and of focus in George’s introductory paragraph.
He writes about Benvolio’s honesty—which was not a characteristic he mentioned in his
introduction—in the excerpt below:
Benvolio is a honest person there are many reasons why Benvolio is very honest
for one example he tells the Prince how a small town fight happens in Verona and
how everyone was involved in that fight. Another example is that when Mercutio
gets killed by Tybalt and then Romeo kills Tybalt, Benvolio tells that Tybalt
killed Mercutio but even tells that Romeo killed Tybalt. He could’ve lied and said
Mercutio and Tybalt killed each other during the fight. This shows he’s honest to
every one even if he has to tell the truth on his friends and family but he also tells
Romeo to run away before Prince Escslus came to punish him which proves he’s
a good friend and cares.
His essay, while not as repetitive as Louis’s, is riddled with grammatical errors and runon sentences. Like in his introductory paragraph, the first two ideas he puts forth are one and the
same; the repetition is unnecessary and diminishes his voice. His second and third sentences are
Gerrity 17
convoluted: “for one example … Romeo killed Tybalt.” He describes a sequence of events
without explaining the reasons for the characters’ actions, which makes his writing confusing.
Additionally, the two sentences mentioned above are repetitious: he uses the word “tells”
three times, “fight” twice, and some form of “kill” four times in these two short sentences,
which, again, takes away from a sense of authoritative voice. The syntax, or arrangement of his
words, and his lack of precise verbs makes his writing confusing. For example, George says,
“Benvolio tells that Tybalt killed Mercutio but even tells that Romeo killed Tybalt.”
Syntactically, his use of “but even tells that” to connect the two conflicting ideas of Benvolio’s
honesty about murder committed by an enemy as well as by a friend is jarring and confusing; it
does not provide the necessary emphasis needed to explain the significance of Benvolio’s refusal
to lie for a friend, which highlights his unwavering honesty.
Furthermore, George’s use of the phrase “tells that” is confusing because he does not say
who it is that Benvolio is talking to. It is unclear whether he meant to say, “Benvolio tells the
prince that…” or if he simply meant, “Benvolio says that…” Here, as a teacher, I can sense what
my student’s intention was, but I also recognize that he did not effectively get his point across.
His lack of precise verbs continues to result in unnecessary words in the remainder of this
excerpt, and these extra words, arranged in sentences in a confusing order, make his writing
unclear and his voice absent.
George’s ideas about Benvolio’s honesty, as well as his supporting examples, are sound.
However, when specifically relating the action of the play and why characters acted as they did,
George struggles. Unlike Louis, George displays that he understands the text; however, he
struggles to explain it. This may be due to a lack of the vocabulary necessary to talk about the
Gerrity 18
play; knowing the language necessary to discuss a topic helps to create a clear, confident,
authoritative voice.
In her character analysis essay, Sally writes about Romeo: “Romeo’s character traits of
being romantic, loyal, and moody all lead him to death in the end.” This thesis statement, while
passively written, is clear and to the point. Sally seems to have somewhat of an authoritative
voice here. An excerpt from her essay is as follows:
Romeo is sometimes loyal in the play. Romeo shows his loyalty to Juliet when
Tybalt wants to fight. Romeo and Juliet are secretly married now so Tybalt and
Romeo are related. Romeo doesn’t want to fight family. Tybalt kills Mercutio in
the fight. Romeo then kills Tybalt after Tybalt kills Mercutio. Romeo is loyal
to Mercutio when he kills Tybult. He’s lloyal to Mercutio because Tybalt
killed Mercutio and Mercutio was sticking up for Romeo. So then Romeo got
this rage of anger after Tybult killed Mercutio. Tybalt was being so rude to
Romeo that Mercutio didn’t like it, so he was standing up for Romeo by
fighting Tybalt. With Romeo being loyal this leads to his death in the end
because he gets banished from Verona because of the fight and cant be there for
Juliet. Romeo is also romantic in the play to Juliet and Rosealine.
In her essay, Sally clearly explains how Romeo is loyal to Juliet by refusing to fight
Tybalt. In the following six sentences (above highlighted in bold), however, she stumbles over
the same plot incident that George did: the fight between Tybalt, Mercutio, and Romeo. While
explaining the intricacies of this fight, she attempts to be as clear as possible, but her writing
actually begins to be very repetitive. She explains the events of the fight and includes the
characters’ motivations for fighting as well; however, she backtracks and explains events out of
Gerrity 19
order, causing for confusion. This detracts from her authentic voice by making her appear less
confident and direct about the events in the play. Additionally, she begins her paragraph with
“Romeo is sometimes loyal in the play,” a sentence that, because of the word “sometimes,” is not
a strong and authoritative statement and that diminishes her authoritative voice.
The wordiness of her writing, caused in part by her use of passive voice (“with Romeo
being loyal this leads…” rather than “Romeo’s loyalty leads”) also takes away from the clarity of
her writing. Additionally, the fixed format of the five paragraph essay—and a lack of
understanding of how to use it to write creative and interesting essays—is evident in the last
sentence of the above excerpt. She ends the paragraph by transitioning to her next idea;
however, this “transition” is no more than the topic sentence of her next paragraph tacked onto
the end of this paragraph. Like Louis and George, Sally appears not to be particularly interested
in the topic of her essay. While she appears to understand the content of the play, she is unable
to fully explain it. The lack of clarity and of voice here may be due to a lack of authority, of
necessary vocabulary, and of interest.
After teaching thesis statements and seeing the theses my students had produced, I felt
confident that they understood what a thesis statement was, how to write one, and how to use it
to guide the remainder of an essay. While students could write clear and comprehensible thesis
statements, they could not then organize the rest of their essay around these statements. Their
theses were not organically their own, and the resultant attempt to argue a thesis statement so
contrived and inauthentic robbed them of their natural use of authentic voice. They perhaps were
unsure of what their thesis statements truly meant and so could not write about them with the
authority or interest necessary to produce clear writing and authentic voice.
Gerrity 20
Additionally, I had not equipped my students with the language and interest necessary to
confidently write with voice about their topics. Barbara Riser says of essay writing: “Students
are exposed to hundreds of essay questions in the course of their educational careers, but seldom
are they prepared to handle the complex thought processes necessary in order to organize their
ideas into a correct expository essay” (56). It was evident that my students were not prepared to
handle the thought processes necessary to correctly argue the contrived thesis statements I
instructed them to write. Their writing showed their confusion, which resulted in a lack of voice.
Besides the contrived thesis statements that hindered my students from accessing their
authentic voice, the assignment itself is an example of high stakes writing, which can hinder the
use of voice in writing. On this topic, Peter Elbow says, “In their high stakes writing, they
[students] often struggle in nonproductive ways and produce terrible and tangled prose” (New
Directions 7). This seemed to describe exactly the process and result of my classes’ Romeo and
Juliet character analysis essays. “Tangled” is exactly what their essay writing was, and this
tangle prevented them from writing with voice.
My students’ essays lacked clarity and voice for several additional reasons. Many
students’ essays lacked an authoritative voice. In their essays, my students seemed to have ideas
about Romeo and Juliet, which they were not able to clearly convey, perhaps because they did
not feel comfortable or confident speaking so definitely about a text. They had relatively little
experience analyzing a text and writing about their analysis. It is no wonder that they struggled
to clearly convey their own humble opinions about a text that has been established as one of the
great classic pieces of literature for several hundred years before they read it.
This definite quality that their essays were to be written in may have emerged from the
instruction that students were not to write in the first person in their essays. Many students were
Gerrity 21
new to the concept of essentially writing their opinions and ideas about a text without using the
word “I” in their writing. This may have made them feel even less confident to speak than if
they had been allowed to write in the first person. The fact that they may not have fully
understood the text they were writing about surely came into play in the lack of voice in their
essays as well.
Journals and the Emergence of Voice:
The journal prompts that I assigned my students during The Outsiders unit were of a
much different nature than the Romeo and Juliet character analysis essay. Journal prompts were
completed in Google Docs. I had one Google Doc that I shared with all of my classes. When I
assigned a journal prompt, I would post the prompt in my main journal, and students would copy
and paste it into their own journals. They would then proceed to answer the journal in their own
Google Docs, which were shared with me. I would then read their journal responses and
comment on them, asking questions and leaving feedback in the hopes of evoking clearer, more
elaborate responses on the next journal. For example, below is an excerpt from one of my
students’ journal entries, followed by my comments to that student, Louis.
Louis’ excerpt: My personal identity is I’m very random. I also can at times when
I’m talking run out of stuff to say and start saying random things that i never
would actually say. My group of friends identity is so weird you would not
believe the stuff we talk about. We are very different types of people and are
never afraid to talk about anything personal.
My comments: Louis, this is an interesting and thoughtful start to a journal
response. You share some great ideas, but providing some specific examples will
Gerrity 22
help to make your thoughts clearer. What kind of random things do you say?
Why do you say things that you wouldn’t normally say sometimes? What types
of strange things do your friends talk about?
While Louis’s writing here contains more voice than his essay or other pieces I’ve seen
from him, there is room for improvement. Giving specific examples may help to evoke strong
feelings and honest statements, a well developed personality, and a genuine interest in the topic
that the reader can sense, which are all aspects of authentic voice, according to Peha.
For every journal entry, students were given 5-10 minutes to respond to each prompt in
class, about once or twice a week. I instructed students to write at least 6 sentences for each
prompt, and I encouraged them to write more. I also told students to remember the rules of
writing, including grammar and spelling, but I let them know that they would not be graded on
grammar. Instead, they were graded on the quality and development of their ideas; each journal
response was worth 5 points, a relatively small amount for the unit.
I designed each journal prompt with the intention of allowing students to use both their
knowledge of The Outsiders and their own experiences in their responses. Examples of journal
prompts are as follows: “How would you describe your personal identity? What is your group of
friend’s identity? What does it mean to be an outsider?” (Journal 1), and “Consider your own
experiences, as well as chapters 1 and 2 of The Outsiders, to answer the following questions in at
least 6 sentences: Do social class and wealth affect happiness? Why or why not?” (Journal 2).
These journal prompts allowed students to write in the first person about ideas and issues they
faced on a daily basis. They could answer in a variety of ways and were encouraged to express
their opinions in their answers. It was my hope that such journal prompts would help to evoke
authentic voice (as defined by Peha) by encouraging students to freely write their thoughts and
Gerrity 23
opinions with honesty, using strong statements; to show that they cared about the topic in their
writing and to show a bit of their personality in the process; and to write with authenticity and
appropriate tone.
Journal writing is an example of low stakes writing, and, according to Jim Burke,
journals allow students to express themselves in a way in which they do not feel judged by
others: “They… provide students with a space where they can take risks; think differently; and,
at times, write more honestly than they could if their thinking were public” (181). He says of
journal writing: “This absence of judgment and the opportunity to write are especially helpful for
struggling writers and English language learners who need to develop their fluency free of fear”
(181). This judgment-free space to take risks was not present during the writing of the character
analysis essay. By assigning each journal entry a relatively low point value, by taking a small
amount of time to complete each entry in class, by encouraging students to write anything that
came to mind, and by supplying topics that were relevant to my students’ lives, I hoped to foster
authentic voice in my students’ journal writing.
Louis, who wrote about the “funny” traits of Mercutio in his essay, responds to the
following journal prompt: “How would you describe your personal identity? What is your group
of friend’s identity? What does it mean to be an “outsider”?
My personal identity is I’m very random. I also can at times when I’m talking run
out of stuff to say and start saying random things that i never would actually say.
My group of friends identity is so weird you would not believe the stuff we talk
about. We are very different types of people and are never afraid to talk about
anything personal.
Gerrity 24
Compared to his essay, Louis’s journal entry is clearer and less repetitive. In fact, the
second sentence of the excerpt actually provides insight as to why his essay might have been so
repetitive: when he runs out of “stuff to say,” rather than not saying anything at all, he “start[s]
saying random things that [he] would never actually say.” Rather than only writing his ideas and
producing a significantly shorter essay, Louis repeated one idea several times to stretch it into an
entire paragraph of his essay.
There are grammar errors in both his essay and his journal, and yet, the journal entry
contains more developed content and is much easier to read and understand. Additionally, each
sentence contains a new idea, unlike his repetitive essay. This is perhaps due to Louis’s interest
and engagement in the topic; he writes about his own life and his own experiences, which he
feels authorized to confidently speak about. He writes with honesty about the “weird” and
“random” things he and his friends talk about. As his teacher, I can hear his voice in his writing;
he has what Elbow refers to as “resonance.”
Another student, George, responds to the following journal prompt: “Do social class and
wealth effect happiness? Why or why not?”
No i don't think wealth effects happiness because I just don't think it does I have
some friends who aren't rich and they have as much as fun as anyone else does. I
do think social class matters though cause there are some kids who get made fun
of cause they don’t talk or hangout with anyone. I see kids who do have money
and don’t have many friends most the time cause they think there better. I'm
known in this school so I have a lot of people to talk to and to hang out with. Also
there are kids excluded for not having as much money because or cause of the
Gerrity 25
clothes they wore. Also a down of being rich is that they always want to do
something that not everyone can waste money on.
In his journal entry, George makes mistakes in punctuation, capitalization, misused or
misspelled words, and run-on sentences similar to those in his essay. However, his writing is
much less convoluted. His syntax is much more standard, and his diction, for the most part, is
clear, if not well chosen. For example, when he says, “a down of being rich…” it seems as
though the word “disadvantage” or “drawback,” would be better suited for his meaning;
however, I can sense what his intentions are in using the word “down,” which is likely a word
that is a more familiar and commonly used part of his vocabulary. His clear voice in his journal
may be due to his interest in the topic and his confidence in writing about his own experiences.
He has strong feelings about the topic and appears to write fearlessly and honestly about it. His
writing here is original and his personality shines through.
Sally responds to a different journal prompt: “If you were in Ponyboy and Johnny’s
situation, would you save the children in the burning church? Why or why not?”
If i was in Ponyboy and Johnny’s situation, i would indeed save the kids, no doubt
about it. Those are kids that are still young and haven’t really gotten a chance to
live there life like we have. We are older and have lived it longer. Saving the
children is the right thing to do in my mind. Also there were a lot of kids in that
building and if we didn’t save them then there would have been a lot of sad
parents. I wouldn’t just sit there and hear them cry and watch them all burn, that’s
not me. I would have done what Ponyboy and Johnny did.
In her journal entry, Sally very clearly states her ideas and has no trouble mentioning
specific events from the novel to support her ideas; she writes with confidence and authority.
Gerrity 26
However, it must be noted that, compared to her essay, in her journal, she merely mentions
events and does not explain them in depth, and the event she speaks of (the church fire in The
Outsiders) is less complicated than the Tybalt-Mercutio-Romeo swordfight she struggled to
explain in her essay. Additionally, she clearly and openly states her opinions. She writes with
complete honesty and originality, as if she cares about the topic. Her personality is evident in
her writing, and her voice is resonant.
The Song Mini-Essay and the Balance of Voice:
After The Outsiders journals, the next substantial piece of writing that I assigned and will
examine is The Outsiders song assignment, which was formatted somewhere in between a
journal entry and an essay. It may be called a mini-essay of sorts. This assignment began with a
journal prompt that asked students to think about the themes from The Outsiders that we had
previously brainstormed and discussed in class. It then asked them to write about how that
theme appeared in The Outsiders as well as in their own lives. Students completed this journal
entry, and I gave them feedback on their responses. The next day in class, I introduced the song
assignment. During the previous class, students were instructed to think of a song that reminded
them of The Outsiders. The song assignment required them to explain, in at least 200 words,
how that song showed a theme that was present in the novel, using examples from the text. After
I explained this assignment, I went over two different examples, which my mentor teacher and I
had created, in order to model what I expected of students for this assignment. One of those
examples is pictured below:
Gerrity 27
Though the voice in this example is more academic than personal or resonant, it is clear
and confident; an authoritative voice is present. The verbs used are precise and the presentation
of ideas is logical and not repetitive. Additionally, the way the page looks, its “visage,” as
Romano calls it, is “friendly” and easy to read; the song itself is in italics that separate it from the
Gerrity 28
main body of text, which is broken up into small paragraphs that are not too intimidating to read.
This visage is part of creating voice, as well (“Crafting” 7).
With this and another, similar example as their guide, students completed the song
assignment with varying results. Louis writes about the theme of living life to the fullest in his
song mini-essay, using the song “Young Forever” by Jay-Z featuring Mr. Hudson.
I chose this song because it relates to Ponyboy a lot by being about being forever
young and staying young forever. The song “Forever Young” is about staying
young, not feeling old, and not growing old and becoming old. … In the chorus
when they say “I wanna be forever young” it relates to doing what you want to
do, and not wanted to grow old which none of the greasers wanted to grow old
and Ponyboy was told to stay young as well. … Staying golden really does relate
to this song because it has the same meaning as in the song. The song also talks
about doing what you can before time is up, which Johnny also wants Ponyboy to
do in his life before he dies like Johnny did.
Though the first two sentences repeat the idea of what “Young Forever” is about, by the
end of the third sentence of this excerpt, Louis begins to relate the song to The Outsiders by
connecting the ideas in the song to the motives and feelings of characters in the novel. Later on
in this piece he says something new and valid: he explains how Robert Frost’s poem, “Nothing
Gold Can Stay,” which is referenced in The Outsiders, relates to the song “Young Forever” and
he mentions specific characters to help prove his point. Though his writing here is not complex,
he connects ideas that are present in both the novel and the song, and once he starts explaining
these ideas, he is relatively clear and not as repetitive as when he introduced the song he chose.
Gerrity 29
His initial lack of voice here may be due to a lack of feelings of authority when talking
about a text; it may also be due to a lack of “jargon” needed to write about literature. However,
when Louis begins to write clearly about the song and the book, his tone is appropriate, his
statements are honest, and his writing generally appears to be his own; he has some degree of
resonant voice in this piece.
George writes about the same song in his mini-essay, which discusses the themes of
coping with death and living life to the fullest.
I believe this songs fits with the outsiders theme Stay Golden because it shows
that we should stay young and live life. I believe when Ponny Boy sees the poem
I think it sends him the message of to keep moving and live like its your last day.
This song also fits with when Johnny dies it showes that everyone dies and you
cant stay young forever as Ponny Boy also realizes after Dally dies to. . . . Also, I
think this song means when there waiting for the worst thing to happen and try to
take care of it like when Johnny dies and when they all get into the rumble.
In his song mini-essay, George makes the same grammatical errors that were present in
his essay and journal entries. However, his writing is significantly clearer than that of his essay.
In this excerpt, George talks about big ideas, such as the theme of coping with death as well as of
living life to the fullest. The song he chose in this assignment represents a part of his daily life,
and his connection to it indicates his interest in the topic. He writes honestly about the topic of
living life to the fullest in the face of death, and he clearly shows his understanding of both the
song and the novel, while letting a bit of his personality leak into his writing. His writing
contains resonant voice here.
Gerrity 30
However, similar to his character analysis essay, when George tries to explain a specific
event in the novel in relation to his discussion about the themes present in both the novel and the
song, he struggles to clearly convey his ideas. The meaning of the last sentence of the excerpt is
incomprehensible: “Also, I think this song means when there waiting for the worst thing to
happen and try to take care of it like when Johnny dies and when they all get into the rumble.”
From this sentence, I can surmise that the subject he speaks of is the greasers from the novel, but
I cannot be sure what about Johnny’s death or the rumble is specifically related to the song. The
lack of clarity and voice here may be due to a lack of vocabulary necessary to explain the
content.
Sally writes about the theme of friendship in her mini-essay, using the song “Slipped
Away” by Avril Lavigne.
The theme of the story is how friends are so important and how you can loose a
friend. I choose this song because its about loosing a close friend, in which
Ponyboy has. … This song is about how a close friend one day can just leave and
never come back. Well, Cherry, Randy, Dally soda, and Ponyboy lost someone
close to them in the story.In the song the lines “The day you slipped away…Was
the day i found It, won’t be the same” Is what its like to loose a close friend. I
think this is how they all felt when they lost their close friend.
In her song assignment, she continues writing in the clear voice that emerged in her
journal entries. Despite some syntactical errors (“friend, in which Ponyboy has” rather than
“friend, which Ponyboy has”), she writes clearly and honestly about the theme of losing a loved
one, using examples from both the text as well as the song she chose. She displays her own
opinions about this theme, as well: “I think this is how they all felt when they lost their close
Gerrity 31
friend.” It appears that, here, as in her journal, she is interested in the topic and has strong
feelings about it. Her personality, while not as potent as in her journal entry, is evident, and her
tone is appropriate. Her voice here is resonant, authoritative, and recognizable; it is her own.
Concluding Thoughts: Clarity, Voice, and High and Low Stakes Writing:
The difference in voice in my students’ essays, journals, and mini-essays is likely
connected to the type of assignment that produced each piece of writing. What is the difference
between writing an essay and writing a journal entry? What are the expectations for each type of
assignment, and how do students approach writing something like an essay compared to a
journal? When I turned to research, I found an abundance of material of high stakes versus low
stakes writing.
The character analysis essay is an example of high stakes writing. Peter Elbow defines
high stakes writing as: writing that is used “for demonstrating learning” (Assigning and
Responding). He maintains that assignments like essays and essay tests are necessary for
students to fully demonstrate their learning. Other modes of assessment, such as short-answer or
multiple-choice tests, allow student to “seem to know things… that they don’t really understand”
(Elbow, Assigning and Responding). High stakes writing assignments, he says, “produce
learning, but they are more loaded because we judge the writing carefully for soundness of
content and clarity of presentation” (Assigning and Responding).
While high stakes writing is useful, low stakes writing, like journaling, may be more
helpful in encouraging students to write with authentic voice. Toby Fulwiler, Art Young, and M.
Elizabeth Sargent define low-stakes writing assignments as those that are “frequent, informal
assignments that make students spend time regularly reflecting in written language on what they
Gerrity 32
are learning from discussions, readings, lectures, and their own thinking” (Elbow, New
Directions 7). It is used for “learning, figuring out, and exploring new and complicated ideas,”
according to Elbow (Elbow, Assigning and Responding). Students’ low stakes writing, he says,
“is usually livelier, clearer, and more interesting—in spite of any carelessness and mistakes”
(Elbow, Assigning and Responding). Elbow’s description of low stakes writing also describes
my students’ journal writing, which certainly are clearer, livelier, and more interesting than their
essay writing.
Elbow argues that the use of low stakes writing in class is beneficial for several reasons,
including that it helps to improve students’ high stakes writing. He says, “I’ve almost never seen
a piece of low stakes writing I couldn’t easily understand. But I’ve seen lots of high stakes
writing that students have worked very hard on—and found it impenetrable” (Elbow, New
Directions 7). In high stakes writing, students “write for a grade,” and “they tend to play it
safe—making large generalizations and running away from what they are not sure of” (Elbow,
Assigning and Responding). Because low stakes assignments are often informal and graded
informally, they allow student to “explore perplexity—something they need not only for the sake
of learning but for the sake of greater conceptual depth in their finished essays” (Elbow,
Assigning and Responding). Additionally, if students are accustomed to writing informally, they
will be “much less liable to be held back by fear or inability to put what they know on paper
when they come to high stakes writing” (Elbow, New Directions 6).
Similarly, Tom Romano proposes: “students need to learn to respond with language to
the images, urges, and the felt sense of right and wrong arising in them” (Writing” 51). In other
words, students need to learn to allow their authentic voices to enter into their written work.
Romano continues: “They need to develop the habit of writing immediately upon the passion of
Gerrity 33
seeing and feeling and thinking, especially when they don’t know where such writing might lead
them” (“Writing” 51-52). In support of low stakes writing assignments, Romano claims that
“Writing quickly and fearlessly about topics and experiences they [students] are passionate about
pushes along their intellectual development” (“Writing” 52). Low stakes assignments, like
journal writing, allow students to “forget about audience, correctness, and procedures,” which
may be present in essay writing, leading them to access their “unfettered voice[s]” in their
writing (“Writing” 52). Low stakes writing assignments teach students “to roar forth with faith
and fearlessness” in their writing, as well as lead to “extended, revised, and polished writing”
(“Writing” 52). Additionally, Romano cautions against high stakes assignments, saying that
teachers must be prudent about what forms they impose on their students: “Strict form and
audiences that are ‘grammatically high-strung’ … can block or skew our voices” (“Writing” 52).
Taking my research about high and low stakes writing into consideration, I believe that
assigning journal writing was a step in the right direction in terms of encouraging my students
with write with voice. However, in my classroom this past year, I do not believe a comfortable
atmosphere that truly encouraged risk-taking was fully developed. While I attempted to foster
authentic voice in my students writing, I do not think my students developed the level of
confidence necessary to produce strong, clear writing every time they wrote. However, by
assigning low stakes writing assignments as well as topics that related to students’ lives, I
engaged students in their writing—at least at times—which allowed them to tap into their
authentic voices often.
The next time I teach writing, I will try several tactics in order to better foster clarity and
authentic voice in my students’ writing. I will first and foremost try to set up a stronger writing
community in which student feel more comfortable taking risks by having students write in their
Gerrity 34
journals every day and share their informal pieces of writing regularly. By having students
complete low stakes writing assignments regularly, I hope to not only encourage them to become
more comfortable with writing but also to improve their high stakes writing. In their high stakes
writing assignments, I will encourage students to choose their own topics and create their own
thesis statements, thereby increasing student interest in their writing. These topics or thesis
statements could even stem from students’ daily low stakes writing. Self-chosen topics and
thesis statements would hopefully allow for writing products that maintained space for student
opinions and experiences, which would encourage students to write honestly and assertively.
Additionally, I would allow students to write in the first person in their formal essays and other
high stakes writing assignments.
Many factors contribute to the fostering of authentic voice in developing writers. As
stated by the experts, an atmosphere in which writers feel safe enough and in which they have
enough confidence in themselves to take risks is essential to the emergence of authentic voice in
writing (Elbow, “Voice as a Lightning Rod”; Romano “Writing” 55). According to Peha,
Elbow, and Romano, the writer’s engagement with the topic he is writing about as well as with
the idea of practicing writing in order to improve are helpful in evoking a clear voice as well.
Once these qualities are established in the classroom and in the writer, he will feel confident
enough to write honestly and with strong feelings, he will be unafraid to show his personality in
his writing and to develop that personality so that it shines through his writing, and he will write
with authenticity and originality in an appropriate tone for his audience and purpose.
Gerrity 35
Works Cited:
Burke, Jim. The English Teacher’s Companion: A Complete Guide to Classroom, Curriculum,
and the Profession. 3rd ed. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2008. 181-97. Print.
Elbow, Peter. "High Stakes and Low Stakes in Assigning and Responding to Writing."
Assigning and Responding to Writing in the Disciplines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1997. Print.
Elbow, Peter. “High Stakes and Low Stakes in Assigning and Responding to Writing.” New
Directions for Teaching and Learning. 1997.69 14 Dec 2002. 5-13. ERIC. Web. 23 May
2011.
Elbow, Peter. The Pleasures of Voices in the Literary Essay: Explorations in the Prose of Gretel
Ehrlich and Richard Selzer., 1987. ERIC. Web. 24 May 2011.
Elbow, Peter. "Voice as a Lightning Rod for Dangerous Thinking." ERIC. Web. 24 May 2011.
Peha, Steve. "What is Good Writing?" Teaching That Makes Sense. Steve Peha, 2003. Web. 20
Apr 2011.
Risser, Barbara. "Formula Essay Writing: A New Approach." English Journal (1997): 56-58.
Web. 24 May 2011.
Romano, Tom. "Crafting Authentic Voice." Voices from the Middle 3.2 (1996): 5-9. Web. 15
Feb 2011.
Romano, Tom. “Writing with Voice.” Voices from the Middle 11.2 (2003): 50-55. Web. 23 May
2011.
Warner, Mary. Winning Ways of Coaching Writing: A Practical Guide for Teaching Writing
Grades 6-12. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2001. 1-14. Print.