Bottom-up or Top-down?

*In A Theory of Discourse, James Kinneavy suggested that writing instruction must follow a top-down approach, in contrast with current—traditional rhetoric and its bottom-up approach. Do you agree or disagree?*

For the most part, I agree with Kinneavy’s support of a top-down approach opposed to the current-traditional approach to writing instruction. As Williams states, “by focusing on bits and pieces of writing—sentences, paragraphs, and grammar—the current-traditional approach ignores most of what writing is about” (Williams p. 45). Providing students with an in-depth knowledge of the structural features of writing will not do much to improve their writing skills because, as O’Hare discovered, this added stress could in turn affect their ability to effectively communicate their point. Also, according to Hillocks’ study, “teaching grammar has no measureable effect on writing performance” (Williams p. 51). If the information found in these studies is true, it should be fairly clear that a bottom-up approach is not the most effective way to teach writing to students. Although I firmly believe that a writer’s argument is the most important part, I still feel that proper grammar and a varying degree of structure are necessary components to any quality paper. Based on the findings that Williams presented in chapter two, I believe that a top-down approach to writing instruction is the most beneficial for students.