lovely conversation going on here Sandra :) just as I was about to join it, it was at a point in considering the effects of letting writers do it 'wrong' where Aaron and lessur jm turn to posting, and the next post, perfectly timed, deliberate or no, is a weed post in the otherwise pleasant garden of this discussion (irrelevant spam by some random advertiser - Mirza Saad) - very funny.
Anyway, a couple of things came to mind for me reading all this - one is the importance of focusing BOTH on process and on product. I think it's incredibly helpful to learners when we ignore the 'outcome' for a while and pay very close attention to the dialogic process of developing an increasingly coherent and satisfactory 'text'... but it's also incredibly helpful to learners when we strategically pay attention to text at scale, to see patterns that students new to academic discourse are not yet aware of - so it's very important for universities to maintain somewhere accessible (such as in our so-called Learning Development centres) collections of texts that we can show students, to illustrate what the genre they're tasked to 'do' actually looks like, and is 'expected' to look like, to illustrate typical instances of incoherence or of success, so we can compare and discuss.
But I was also wondering Sandra btw, as you mentioned it in your initial post that we're commenting on, whether the 'first year without high stakes grading' idea is generally popular in the UK or controversial? We have a new exec team at my institution who are keen to import that model (not coincidentally, they're from UK), but they're not supplying us with any evidence to support the move, so I'm really curious to know as much as I can about this, and what studies have been done around it.... know of any good refs?
Thanks for drawing attention to the complexities of writing and the teaching of academic writing in this group Sandra - nice to see our daily bread on the table for all to share and enjoy :)