January 30th

Harris:
Summary: Harris focuses on the merit of revision through multiple-drafts, and the possible benefits that may come from this.  Through the article he deconstructs the idea that a better paper will always come from revision. (specifically multi-draft.)

I personally don't feel multi-draft writing yields more success, and I will usually refine my views, and the ideas I'm presenting to get an overall finer product without completely re-writing the paper.

Responses:  One-draft writer.  
                    My final draft is built from the scaffolding of the original paper.  I only edit, and add to the original ideas.
                    The disadvantage to this is that if i do not put in an appropriate amount of research I may stray from the more important ideas of the subject.

Ransom:
Summary: In this response to Berkenkotter's research of Murray,  Domineq Ransom feels that the methods of evaluating a writer are inadequate because the gaps that are left in the "Think Aloud Protocol" because of fear of critique, and a lack of reflection from the subject.  She instead suggests it would be more effective to evaluate your own writing process through notes in the margin, which allow you to reflect on the development of your view on the subject material.

The thing I liked most about this article was that it managed to assert its views, and compare them to previous studies while being succinct.  ( I think a reader can deconstruct an idea without the step by step guidance of a writer.)

list: Study yourself  (?)

I've not personally taken notes for the sake of exploration,  and I tend to only write for an objective. The ideas for this objective oriented writing are developed long before pen comes to paper.