As Emig suggests, writing is a unique and introspective method of learning. Over the course of the semester, I have been trying to implement a method of instruction that utilizes this very simple principle (even more so after we discussed it in class). Emig makes a differentiation between writing and talking that I think can be bridged in a very practical way. At the beginning of every class in which I plan on having a discussion, I try to show some type of YouTube clip or the like and have my students respond in a freewriting exercise. They know that this will not be collected. Afterward, I ask students to share their thoughts on the issues and the conversation usually commences from there.
The important part (I think) here is that students are given an opportunity to chew on the subject while they write. In freewriting, they are becoming comfortable with the topics and perhaps more importantly becoming aware of their own true opinions of the issue. “Perhaps because there is a product involved, writing tends to be a more responsible and committed act than talking,” suggests Emig. I see the value in allowing students to commit to their thoughts/feelings on a particular topic in order to open up their confidence in talking aloud during conversation. Otherwise, I think students feel as if they are shooting from the hip and don’t want to embarrass themselves publicly. Therefore, freewriting becomes a form of testing their own waters. The discussion, then, will hopefully lead the students to further chew on these ideas and move into a more solidified, thorough understanding of their ideas.
[There is something to be said about Process/Post-Process here that I am probably only hitting on the surface level.]