"Also, Elbow believed that writing is an art and cannot be taught. However, it should be learned. Writing is a dialectic between the self and language and understanding one's vision (Martin, Lecture VI, Slide 10). The debate begins with Elbow because of his lack of seeing that outside social forces of the individual impact how the student uses language for their voice. This made me think of Murray's "All Writing Is Autobiography" and how he truly believed it. (Murray 67). We all experience the world differently, so we will write in a way that demonstrates that. My student, from a war-torn country, first received a formal education in the sixth grade; the way that impacted his learning and social forces affected how he used his voice. How he uses his voice in writing will differ from someone who received a formal education starting in kindergarten in the United States. And then other factors emerge, the student's social class, demographic area (rural, city, worn-torn country, etc., gender, race, language, etc".

"Each writer is immersed in their own unique discourse communities that utilize language in a certain way. It’s important to examine the socio-cultural contexts of writing because writing is an inherently social activity. As Vandenberg et al. writes that in order to fight against the middle-class/standard English use of language, writing teachers should immerse themselves in theories that “recognize their historical institutional role in suppressing difference through the imposition of one set of  discursive  norms.  By  engaging  differences  and  encouraging them to the fore, writing teachers can allow students to explore the ways they have been positioned and perhaps position themselves differently” (16). It can be disheartening to be told by a teacher that your language use isn’t acceptable or that it’s not good enough for the classroom. By highlighting the diverse ways of students’ writing processes or ways of writing, we can begin to move towards an educational system that values all students and welcomes all language use. Though this is a lofty goal, I think that instructors can take small steps, like embracing the diversity of the writing process for instance, that can make their classroom a safe space for all writers. Even having this conversation with students about the ways that socio-cultural influences impact their writing may open up the students’ eyes to a new perspective that they might not have encountered before."

"Buech explains that the strongest application of post-process theory comes in when there is one-on-one instruction between teachers and students. The post-process theory could then be relevant in a writing center environment, She describes this as "a wonderful irony" there is an occasional perceived gap in prestige between post-process theory and writing center practice. Because the writing center focuses on practice, this process allows often allows writing center practice and post-process to overlap. Buech ends her article by explaining her opinion on the rejections, that the process allows teachers to become more in tune with the needs of the students, and considering the rejection of mastery and engagement in dialogue, can be provided as valuable to teachers."

"At the heart of it, post-process is getting away from authoritative teaching and learning methods. Mentoring and one-on-one teaching is a big part of the post-process theory. Writing Center work uses dialogue and is part of the post-process theory too. For educators to be willing to discuss ideas and listen and to be moved by shared understanding, egos need to step aside, and respect for the student and their experiences needs to be present and tuned into. It means not acting as an expert and disregarding the student's intellect. It's learning to listen more than talking to hear oneself speak. Though talking can be needed, the "expert" must find a middle ground. Because what does it mean to write? What does it mean to teach? Does a person need to hold a Ph.D. or any higher level of education to be able to think? To have an intelligent conversation about writing, the world, and the student's relationship to it? If language is a tool, we can use to understand truth, who holds what truth is? How does someone who considers themselves an "expert" humble themselves to discuss writing with their students? The answer lies in dialogue as pedagogy. Where does the "expert," without saying, knows what they are talking about but allows the student to have a voice as well?"

"If courses are the “tools” of the activity system, and tools are taken away, then the other parts of the system must shift, as well. For example, the division of labor may need to change. For example, labor-based grading is used by some instructors to address the problem of overloading classes and instructors’ schedules with large composition classes. When analyzing the system, also, it would be a good idea to ask what the motive of English 101 is within the subjects in the system. The subjects of English 101 are not only students and teacher but also the administration of the college who makes the curricular decisions that are based on political, economical, and social conditions such as Obama’s austerity-driven pathways (Scott and Welch). The object of the English 101 class curriculum and its outcome might be described pedagogically at one level and in terms of state funding at another level."