Being a victim of the Product approach, it is very easy to relate to the content.It is often said that teachers teach the way that they were taught. I remember being drilled with Spelling competitions and being compelled into writing composition each time with the reminder that Common Entrance, the imposing frightening ordeal that each Grade six student is put through, was around the corner.I remember learning vocabulary in isolation where I was forced to learn the meaning of the words. The archaic and Jurassic methods of teaching students involved their learning for a particular exam and not for life.Personally, I believe that such a system is designed to sift the grain from the chaff as students who were not so academically inclined, who acquired the academic knowledge slower or who learned through different means (Gardner’s multiple intelligences) were especially disadvantaged. It is true that the Product approach has a model text to be imitated and that the emphasis is on the organisation of ideas and on the end product but teachers must realise the damage that such a method carries. True consideration of the Product approach will indeed highlight the faults within.
As teachers, one of our responsibilities is to engage the students as much as possible in the teaching-learning process.We must create an avenue where the students are in charge of their learning and do not have to depend on their teacher to regulate their errors.This is exactly what the Process approach to reading prescribes. The familiar saying is very apt when describing the Process Approach: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for life.It is my experience as a teacher that students, after completing the Common Entrance exam, have no idea how to proceed in terms of writing.After the big finish, it is remarked by teachers that students who have attained high scores in the Common Entrance exam are now unable to properly construct sentences and write paragraphs. This is seen when teachers give students topics or exams to write that they have not been configured to understand. The results are usually very poor- a side effect of the Product approach.
After reading the literature, I am converted in my thinking. Having nothing but my prior knowledge on how I was taught writing, I have taught my students using the same Product approach.I now understand the benefits of the Process approach which include an emphasis on ideas and idea development, on the importance of conferencing and feedback, the various audiences available and the type of writing which may address them and on using the model text as a resource for comparison and not for imitation. Teachers often lament how much work it is to plan group work and how it is much easier to allow the students to imitate a model text. The Process approach, I have come to realise, is ideal for students especially those who have trouble grasping the intricacies of writing because it allows them to interact with their learning and to be able to self-regulate their errors through the writing of multiple drafts and peer interaction. It should not be an option for teachers to use the Process approach because we want to ensure that our students, at the end of the day, are critical thinkers who can write a piece of literature without having a teacher look over their shoulder every second. I have realised that key aspects of writing should not be taught in isolation but should be integrative and in context.
To conclude, I believe that the Product approach should be banned and that teachers desist from using it because of its side-effects of the students being too teacher-dependent.The Process approach, by far, is the better option as teachers will be able to generate exciting fun classrooms where students learn how to write not only for an exam, but for life. I now vow, as an informed teacher, to revamp my easy of instruction and instead adopt the strategies that will benefit the students and not those that will save me from doing too much work.
