The Discursive Piece That Argues Nothing
A student writing for Module C has produced a 1,000-word discursive piece on the topic of silence in families. It contains: an anecdote about a family dinner, a paragraph of reflection, a quoted dictionary definition of 'silence', a shift to second person ('you know this feeling'), and a closing image of an empty chair. Her teacher says it is 'lyrical but weightless'. The assessment requires a discursive piece that 'explores a proposition' and a reflection on craft. The student has read that discursive writing should be 'personal and digressive' and believes the lack of a clear argument is a deliberate feature of the form. She has one redraft available before submission.
1. Distinguish between productive digression and the weightlessness the teacher has identified.
Read the worked answer
The student is half right: discursive writing does tolerate digression, and it need not march to a thesis like an essay. But digression is productive only when it departs from and returns to a proposition. Digression without a proposition is drift.
The distinction is testable. A productive digression raises a question the piece then has to answer, complicates the proposition, or supplies a counterexample the writer must reckon with. Drift changes subject without accumulating pressure. The student's piece has the raw materials for the former - the anecdote, the reflection, the closing image could all be turned to a single question - but currently each section is a separate exhibit.
The dictionary definition is the clearest symptom. Quoting a definition is a way of appearing to make a claim ('silence means X') while actually deferring one. It is also a cliché of the form. It should be cut or, better, replaced by the student's own contested definition - one she will spend the piece testing.
The second-person shift is a related issue: it invites the reader to supply the meaning the writer has not committed to. Used once, it can be intimate; used as a substitute for argument, it is evasion.
2. Propose a proposition the piece could explore, and explain how the existing materials could be reorganised around it.
Read the worked answer
A workable proposition must be contestable - something a reasonable reader could dispute - and narrow enough to be explored in 1,000 words.
For example: 'The silences families keep are not absences of feeling but the most precise expressions of it - which is why they are so difficult to break.' This is arguable (someone could reply that silence is evasion), it is narrow, and it can be tested against the student's existing material.
Reorganisation:
- Open with the dinner anecdote, but frame it as evidence for the proposition rather than as a scene. End the opening with the question the piece will pursue.
- Use the reflective paragraph as a complication, not a restatement: identify a case where silence was evasion, and let the piece strain against its own proposition. This is where productive digression earns its place.
- Replace the dictionary definition with the student's own definition, offered as a claim to be tested.
- Retain the second-person passage but relocate it to the point of maximum tension, where it invites the reader to adjudicate rather than to sympathise.
- Close on the empty chair, but let the image answer the opening question - an image that resolves is worth more than an image that merely recurs.
The structure now has a spine: proposition, evidence, complication, resolution through image.
3. Explain what the accompanying reflection must do to convert these choices into marks.
Read the worked answer
The reflection must make the craft reasoning visible - the marker should be able to see the writer choosing between options, not merely describing the finished piece.
The strongest reflection content here is the revision itself: the student can explain that the first draft was digressive without a proposition, that she identified the dictionary definition as a deferral of argument, and that she replaced it with a contested definition she then tested. That narrative of a craft decision is exactly what the reflection rewards, and it is available to her because she has a redraft.
It should also address:
- Form: why discursive rather than persuasive - because the proposition needed to be explored and complicated, not asserted.
- Register and person: why second person was relocated rather than removed, and what effect the relocation produces.
- Ending: why an image rather than a summary, and how the image answers the opening question.
Errors to avoid: describing the piece's content; claiming effects the piece does not achieve; praising her own prose; and treating 'digressive' as a justification rather than a technique requiring control. Each reflection claim should be tied to a specific choice she can point to in her own text.