ABSTRACT

This essay considers the relative merits of critical writing and writing in role as a means of enabling and assessing students’ responses to literary texts. Drawing largely on the author’s experience of teaching Frankenstein, it argues that the distinction between critical and creative writing is not as absolute as is sometimes supposed, and that so-called ‘creative’ tasks can be a very effective way of generating critical insight. It explores the significant limitations and limiting potential of the critical essay as a form, and argues that creative tasks such as writing in role afford far greater opportunities for school students to write fully and successfully as themselves. It links the longevity and pervasiveness of the critical essay as a mode of assessment within the English school system to its ‘exam-friendliness’, and makes the case for an alternative and more equitable approach that would allow for young people to be judged on their true potential as thinkers and writers.

摘要

本文考虑了批判性写作和角色写作的相对优点，作为一种启用和评估学生对文学文本的反应的手段。主要借鉴作者教授科学怪人的经验，它认为批判性写作和创造性写作之间的区别并不像有时假设的那样绝对，所谓的“创造性”任务可能是产生批判性洞察力的一种非常有效的方式。它探讨了批判性论文作为一种形式的重大局限性和限制潜力，并认为诸如角色写作等创造性任务为学生提供了更大的机会来充分和成功地写作。它将批判性论文作为英语学校系统内评估模式的持久性和普遍性与其“考试友好性”联系起来，并提出了一种替代性和更公平的方法，允许根据他们的判断来评判年轻人。作为思想家和作家的真正潜力。