Articles by Danah Hashem

by Bella Brown

Bella Brown is an environmental science major and a biology minor from Glastonbury, CT. Bella says that she is “super passionate about nature and finding new ways to preserve and understand it” and when she was presented with the task of writing a research paper she knew that she wanted to further explore a podcast episode about trees communicating through fungi, or “talking trees.” She says it “seemed like a huge breakthrough on understanding how our forests function as complex ecosystems.” Bella also notes that one thing she loved about writing this paper was the freedom to choose whatever topic she wanted. “Because I was so interested in the topic I chose, I found myself devoting hours to research, pouring through countless scientific journals and staying up many late nights. I found myself mapping out each part of the system on white boards, drawing trees for my friends, and explaining the fungal networks that connected them beneath the ground.” Bella believes that getting the general public to perhaps find emotional worth in trees can be a large step in helping to preserve our forests. She is also thankful for the opportunity to “connect my passions of the arts and science together, and focus on researching something that real environmental scientists and biologists in the field are still actively studying.” Bella’s goal with this essay was to present science in a way that made sense to those who haven’t studied it. She hopes to continue researching and finding ways to protect our environment.

---

A few months ago, I was on my usual morning podcast walk– a regiment I had established for myself that summer. In search of something new to listen to, I stumbled upon Vox’s Unexplainable – a podcast dedicated to all the debates ongoing in science currently. As an environmental science major and self-proclaimed tree-hugger, the episode “Talking Trees” immediately caught my eye. My first thought was that it was something like Grandmother Willow from Pocahontas, but little did I know there was an entire hidden world underneath the forest. Networks of fungi connect the trees underground, forming something called the Wood Wide Web. The host, Mandy Nguyen explains: “the idea is that trees communicate with each other. Somehow, they use fungi like telephone wires, linking the forest up in a big social network” (Nguyen) According to Nguyen, trees exchange nutrients with each other, send warnings, and help each other grow. Immediately, I was hooked; this could completely change our perspectives on how forests work, and therefore, how we should go about acquiring lumber, planning parks, and neighborhoods. The idea is still widely contested by scientists, for a multitude of reasons which I will get into. So, therein lies the question: Can trees communicate with each other through underground fungal networks? And if so, how?

Before I delve into the issue itself, it’s important to have a basic knowledge of the structure of the Wood Wide Web, and its parts. First the star of the show– the fungus. Deep in the soil of forests exist a tangle of long white fibers, known as “ectomycorrhizal fungi.” The term “ectomycorrhizal” simply means that the fungus encloses the root cells of the trees they connect, rather than penetrate through them, as vesicular–arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus does (Simard et al. 580). These two types of fungi are categories of mycelium– fungi that take on a root-like structure with many threads. The individual branches of the fungus are known as “hypha,” so imagine what bare tree branches look like intertwined in the winter sky, yet underground (Simard et al. 580). These ectomycorrhizal fungi (we’ll call them ECMs for future reference) are in a mutualistic relationship with the trees of the forest. This means that both organisms benefit from their interactions. The idea that “the mycelia act as microbial extensions of tree root systems and improve access to water and nutrients while the fungi in return receive carbon (C) from tree photosynthesis’” is widely accepted as fact in the scientific community (Henriksson et al. 19). Essentially, the trees provide the ECMs with carbon, and in return, the ECMs act as an extension of the tree’s roots and improve their access to nutrients and water.

However, the details of the Wood Wide Web hypothesis are widely debated. Some scientists believe there isn’t enough concrete evidence, but others believe there is just enough. The very first studies were done related to the transfer of carbon through these fungal networks. First done in a lab, scientists labeled a CO2 molecule, in one sapling connected to another by the fungus, and found the same molecule in the other tree (Nguyen). This, however, did not prove the process occurs in the wild, or out in forests naturally. So, Suzanne Simard, in one of the most famous studies surrounding the Wood Wide Web to date, set out to do just that.

Simard, a Canadian environmental scientist and professor, published her 1997 experiment, “Net Transfer of Carbon Between Ectomycorrhizal Tree Species in the Field” in the Nature Journal, and sparked a huge conversation in the scientific community. Seeing as this is the most important study done about the hypothesis, I will explain her process. Simard was testing for two things: to see if the carbon could be transferred through the ECMs in both directions, and to see what affected the magnitude (amount) of carbon transferred. In order to do so, she planted three types of saplings, Paper Birch (Betula Papyrifera) and Douglas Fir (Pseudotsuga Menziesii) which were connected by ECMs. Then she planted Western Red Cedars (Thuja Plicata) which were not, and these acted as a control (Simard et al. 580). Simard labeled molecules of two specific isotopes of carbon and looked to see if these specific molecules were showing up in the trees. The Paper Birches became the “donor trees,” where she input the carbon, and the Douglas Firs the “receiver trees,” who did not have these isotopes of carbon in them originally. She also exposed the Douglas Firs to three different levels of light, to see if the shading of the plant would affect how much carbon was transferred. She repeated this process at two different growth stages– 2 years, and 3 years (Simard et al. 580).

This study brings up one of the big questions surrounding trees communicating through these ECMs: can trees transfer nutrients with each other? And if another tree is struggling, will trees support it and give it extra help? What Simard found was incredible. Not only did the trees transfer carbon with each other in both directions, but when the Douglas Fir was more shaded, the Paper Birch transferred higher amounts of carbon! This “indicat[ed] that source–sink relationships regulate such carbon transfer under field conditions” (Simard et al. 580). A source–sink relationship means that the amount of nutrients given by the source (Paper Birch) are dependent on the ability of the receiver (Douglas Fir) to utilize said nutrients and photosynthesize. A higher sink strength means that the receiver has a higher need for nutrients. So, as the Douglas Firs got less light, they needed more nutrients to be able to survive, and the sink strength increased (Simard et al. 580). This effectively proves that the trees connected by ECMs in the forest work together as a group to survive, and they are able to communicate distress to each other in some way, so that one tree knows how to send nutrients to another!

Simard was sure that this carbon transfer was through the fungal networks, as the “Thuja Plicata seedlings lacking ectomycorrhizal absorb[ed] small amounts of isotope, suggesting that carbon transfer between B. papyrifera and P. menziesii is primarily through the direct hyphal pathway” (Simard et al. 579). The amount of the carbon isotope found in the Western Red Cedar was far less, almost 1% of the carbon transfer between the Birch and Fir trees, and the only difference was that the Redcedars were not connected to the other trees by ECMs (Simard et al. 580). This accounted for nutrient transfer through soil/water, which many scientists believed to be the only way nutrients could move tree to tree. Thus, the majority of the carbon transfer was through the ECMs.

So yes, Simard seemingly proved that the trees in a forest work together, explaining that “a more even distribution of carbon among plants as a result of below-ground transfer may have implications for local interspecific interactions, maintenance of biodiversity and therefore for ecosystem productivity, stability and sustainability” (Simard et al. 581). The transfer of carbon amongst trees balances out the distribution of carbon in the forest and allows for a stable ecosystem. However, all of her experiments were on saplings, or new growth forests. Thus, her findings weren’t enough to convince me that this was true for all forests. But Gabriel Popkins, environmental journalist, agrees with Simard’s claims, providing evidence that this process also occurs in old growth forests. In an interview with Nguyen, Popkins explains that “a scientist in Switzerland…[took] advantage of an experiment that was already being done in a much older, kind of mature forest of several different types of trees,” and showed that “carbon dioxide would be fed to one type of tree. He was able to show that it later showed up in other species of tree” (Popkins qtd. in Nguyen). And since this carbon transfer was proven to occur in both new growth and old growth forests, we can concur that trees can in fact share carbon with each other through these ECMs, and that the trees are in mutualism rather than competition.

This has huge implications. The typical view of forests was that trees were stuck in a Darwinian struggle with each other, where “individual trees compete for light, water, [and] nutrients in the soil, and the ones that survive, reproduce” (Nguyen). But with this new information, we see that trees are acting more like a flock of birds as they help each other to survive. What is so incredible is that it isn’t solely between trees of the same species– it’s all the trees that are connected by this fungus. Therefore, I think scientists who believe in the Wood Wide Web should be giving the fungus itself more credit. In most scientific papers, it is simply viewed as a pathway, rather than a living organism. There must be a reason why the fungus is allowing for this transfer of carbon from tree to tree, but what is it?

Nils Henriksson, forest ecophysiologist, sees that fact that “the evolutionary incentive for a mycorrhizal fungus to redistribute C toward the seedlings has not been addressed,” as proof that the whole process does not exist (21). Essentially, since there hasn’t been a study regarding why the fungi aid in this process, Henriksson believes they simply don’t. However, I think this just means there is more research to be done. There are in fact some hypotheses offered which make logical sense. Popkins offers the idea that:

It may just be that tree one exchanges some sugar with a fungus in exchange for some nutrients. And then the fungus, may say, hey, I’ve got this sugar, now I’m gonna go take it over here and, and give it to this other tree. Because I know that if I sort of strengthen my relationship with the second tree, then this tree will provide me sugar in the future. (Popkins qtd. in Nguyen)

Basically, he’s saying that the fungus randomly distributes the nutrients to other surrounding trees, to create more relationships. However, this idea does not take into account the evidence of the trees’ source-sink relationship with one another. If it was truly random, and the fungus was just spreading sugar to another tree to form another relationship, then the magnitude of carbon transferred would not have increased with the shading of the Douglas Fir.

Kathryn Flinn, plant ecologist, brings the idea of altruism into the mix, possibly filling this hole in Popkin’s claim regarding the ECMs’s motivations. Altruism is when one organism does something to benefit another at a personal cost. There are many reasons why this could occur, but one is that “altruism can arise if a recipient is likely to reciprocate, ultimately benefiting the donor” (Flinn). So, if the fungus knows that the tree it’s being told to transfer the donor tree’s nutrients to will eventually give it some of that carbon, it will transfer the nutrients to it without immediately getting reciprocation. Unfortunately, there has not yet been much research done about this, so we can only speculate.

While Simard has not yet commented on the ECMs’s motivations, she does have another very intriguing idea– the mother tree hypothesis. In her book, Finding the Mother Tree, she explains that “the old trees nurture the young ones and provide them food and water just as we do with our own children” (34). These old trees are known as overstory trees, or those which grow taller than the whole canopy (Henriksson 19). Simard came to this conclusion after a study where she and her team traced the ECMs’s pathways underground, seeing which trees were connected and their relative distances. They found that “although trees from all [age] cohorts were linked, large mature trees acted as hubs with a higher degree of connectivity and a more central position in the [mycorrhizal network]” (Beiler 548). Essentially, in looking at a map of the fungal network, most of the trees are connected to these older trees, they act as grand central stations for the nutrients. It makes sense as to why Simard would think that therefore, these trees act as “mothers” and help the younger trees connected to them grow. However, I offer a completely different take: what if these trees were actually doing the opposite through all these fungal connections and depleting the surrounding trees of their nutrients?

Logistically, it makes sense. How do these trees come to tower so much higher over the forest canopy? Certainly, they couldn’t be giving away a lot of nutrients, they would instead need to be gaining more. And while they do have age on their side, perhaps it is the years of taking that has allowed them to grow so tall. There have actually been a lot of studies showing that seedlings don’t do well growing next to these larger trees, dating way back. As a matter of fact, “as early as 1926, a Finnish field study showed that below ground competition hampered seedling establishment in extremely nutrient-poor Scandinavian pine heaths” when they were surrounded by older trees (Henriksson et al. 20). So rather than sharing their nutrients with the seedlings to help them grow in an area with depleted soil, the older trees outcompeted them for what little nutrients existed in the ground.

At the time, scientists did not know of the existence of ECMs, but using the knowledge we now have, it would make sense if these older trees were taking the carbon from the seedlings without returning any, in order to survive in such a nutrient poor area. A similar, more recent study done in British Columbia, also showed that “soil moisture content and [Nitrogen] mineralization rates were also lower in the presence of overstory trees (Walters et al. 2006), indicating higher competition for these resources, rather than facilitation” (Henriksson et. al 21). Basically, the soil surrounding the older trees was very depleted of nutrients, indicating that the trees were competing for these resources instead of sharing. Thus, proving that these overstory trees were taking the resources from the soil before the seedlings could get to them. In addition to these studies, we can simply look at the way trees reproduce. Kathryn Flinn brings up a great point that “a mature maple tree produces millions of seeds, and on average only one will grow to reach the canopy. The rest will die, with or without help from mom.” These seedlings start to grow all around the older maple tree– millions– yet only one survives. If the mother tree hypothesis was really true, many more would survive to grow up and join their “mother.” Thus, I deduce that overstory trees are really using these ECMs as a way to take nutrients from seedlings, rather than share with them. It is more of a parasitic relationship than mutualistic.

Another big problem scientists have with this idea of the mother tree hypothesis and the Wood Wide Web, is that the general public is comparing them to humans. This is anthropomorphism because people are attaching human traits and emotions to the trees, and whether or not the science proves these hypotheses, they want to believe them. Every time I’ve explained what I’m writing this essay about to friends, I usually get the response that it’s “so cute” that trees are sharing with each other. Immediately, people want to believe everything that’s told to them, because it’s “cute” and kind of like the trees are “friends.” Popkins expresses his concern for this as “we really do wanna be careful about anthropomorphizing trees because trees are, um, very, very different from us in a lot of really important ways…it doesn’t mean that there isn’t complicated, profound, nuanced stuff going on in the forest. It just means that we can’t sort of map our own concepts onto that. We need to really try to understand trees and forests on their own terms” (Popkins qtd. in Nguyen). However, Simard brings up a valuable point that perhaps anthropomorphizing science is a useful tool to get the general public to care about these environmental issues. As a matter of fact, “in interviews, Simard has said that she purposely uses anthropomorphism and culturally weighted words like ‘mother’ – even though the trees in question are male as well as female – so that people can relate to trees better, because ‘if we can relate to it, then we’re going to care about it more’” (Flinn). It makes sense– it’s simple psychology that we care more about things we can see ourselves in. So, when it comes to issues like forests, and climate change, perhaps anthropomorphism can be a valuable tool. If the general public cares, then it reaches up to the government, and if the government cares, then they can pass legislation to protect our environment.

All in all, more research must be done. There is still work to be done looking at the transfer of other nutrients through these fungi. Simard and Popkins only discuss the transfer of carbon yet generalize it to the transfer of “all nutrients,” which is a very big step to take. Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and water are all very different compounds. We also must do more research regarding the fungi’s motivations. The interactions between organisms in nature are much more complicated than just good and bad; ecosystems are an intricate network of relationships that we do not fully understand. However, one thing remains true, ectomycorrhizal fungus is an organism. Organisms don’t just do things for no reason. Every interaction in an ecosystem has a purpose; they all meld together to prevent collapse. But there has not been a single study finding the reason, and that is what needs to happen next. And while my claim that overstory trees use these fungal networks to take rather than give does have evidence backing it, there has not been a study done on this exact idea yet. I may be an environmental science major, but I am also a freshman, who has not studied this in the field before.

But there are a few things we know for sure. Trees can talk to each other. The mutualistic relationship between the fungi and the trees creates another intricate relationship between the trees themselves. And since we know that trees share carbon with each other to survive, it brings up the idea that “if I cut down one tree the rest of the rest will be fine.” Because now we know, it probably won’t be! This should be taken into consideration in any situation where trees are being cleared. Tree preservation is imperative as they are our main source of oxygen. If we cut down one tree in the forest, and the others are depleted of nutrients, then they may die. When they die, we lose a source of oxygen which adds up to the thousands of forests being clear-cut. And FYI, we need oxygen to survive. Trees are also habitats for thousands of organisms and if you take them away, the ecosystem collapses. Ecosystem collapse has giant societal effects, as we rely on animals and organisms for our culture and livelihoods. So, if not to preserve the forests just for the sake of protecting them, then we should work to preserve us, the human race, and our culture. The earth is our only home. If it dies, we die.

Works Cited

Beiler, Kevin J., et al. “Architecture of the Wood-Wide Web: Rhizopogon spp. Genets Link Multiple Douglas-fir Cohorts.” New Phytologist, vol. 185, no. 2, Jan. 2010, pp. 543-553.

Flinn, Kathryn. “The Idea That Trees Talk to Cooperate Is Misleading.” Scientific American, 19 July 2021.

Henriksson, Nils, et al. “Re‐Examining the Evidence for the Mother Tree Hypothesis – Resource Sharing among Trees via Ectomycorrhizal Networks.” New Phytologist, vol. 239, no. 1, 7 May 2023, pp. 19-28.

Nguyen, Mandy, host. “Talking Trees.” Unexplainable, Episode 119, Vox, 12 April 2023.

Simard, Suzanne. Finding the Mother Tree. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 2021.

Simard, Suzanne W., et al. “Net Transfer of Carbon Between Ectomycorrhizal Tree Species in the Field.” Nature, vol. 388, no. 6642, Aug. 1997, pp. 579–582.

As I write this introduction in August 2023, I have, within the last 48 hours, been surrounded by talk and text about LLMs: the algorithmic processes that generate human-like language in tools like OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Colleagues have forwarded handwringing articles by nervous writing teachers; I’ve collected and reviewed model course policies and public statements addressing the role of LLMs in classroom settings; I’ve responded to text messages and social media posts from colleagues for recommendations on how to respond to unauthorized LLM use in student writing; and I’m currently planning a forum on the subject for our program’s all-faculty meeting. When it comes to writing, AI is hogging the spotlight in 2023.

Some versions of the “literacy crisis” panic suggest that LLMs spell doom for writing, especially in schools. Won’t students stop reading and writing for themselves? Won’t AI tools reproduce racial and gender bias? Should we stop assigning writing altogether? Anticipating the surge in concerned interest among teachers, Mahdi Almosawi (“The Future of AI in the Classroom”) addresses the AI literacy crisis, acknowledging that, yes, tools like ChatGPT can mislead and cause harm—but it is also a writing tool like any other that teachers should acknowledge and incorporate into the classroom, so that students can learn the affordances and constraints of using such tools. In the same vein, Avery Knott (“Who Are the ‘Chronically Online’ and What Can They Teach Us about Public Discourse?”) brilliantly showcases the social and cognitive downsides of a life lived on and for social media: an addictive state that is supported by the very fuel that burns AI fires: algorithms. In both essays, we see that banning and/or ignoring the role of AI in writing ecologies is not only impossible but also dangerous.

In addition to reinforcing the need for students and teachers to pay attention to automated writing, let this issue of Undercurrents serve as a hopeful reminder that, even as we strive to increase our attention to them, bots cannot (yet) do it all. In the Composition Program, we teach and talk often about encouraging students to participate in textual conversations with their sources. In order to do so, however, students must adopt the stance of authority: that is, they are authorized to write back to published source materials as insightful, knowledgeable writers. The nine honorees in the 2023 issue of Undercurrents appear to have gotten the memo.

Several honorees in this issue write overtly about authority and the rhetorical means by which it is obtained, subverted, or oppressed. Gavin Pereira Scoccia (“Schooling and its Effects on Neurodiverse Authority”) and An Tran (“The Case Against the Five-Paragraph Essay”) take schools and common schooling practices to task for the ways they inadvertently suppress student authority by removing students’ opportunities to make meaningful decisions about their writing processes and products. Addressing the role of authority in rhetorical activity outside of school and beyond the written word, Jackelyne Abranches (“Who Is Getting Left Out?: Breaking Down Language Barriers in Healthcare”) examines how a lack of linguistic authority and agency can have serious, even life-threatening, consequences. Madeline Murphy (“Life’s a Fashion Show (If You’re a Teenage Girl)”) considers the rhetorical potential of fashion as a means by which some of the most disempowered members of society can assert a sense of identity and authority among their peer groups.

Additionally, all nine honorees in this issue write with authority as they engage in textual conversations. To the delight of the Undercurrents editorial board, several of those textual conversations engage prior Undercurrents honorees, thereby positioning not only themselves as writers with authority but also their fellow UMass Boston colleagues. Maxine Freda (“Teachers Are Encouraging Bullshit: A Response to Kylie Medeiros”) composes a direct response to—and extension of—Kylie Medeiros’s argument for “bullshit” as a real and legitimate rhetorical strategy among student writers. Armani Dure (“The Practicalities of Code-Switching”) extends and also qualifies Aneika Robinson’s ideas about code-switching among Black speakers and writers. Lynn-sarah Georges (“Do You Know Who You Are When You Write?”) also engages with Robinson’s ideas about code-switching, adding Tyler Tran’s consideration about the homogenizing effects of academic writing and the loss of students’ individual voices.

Many congratulations to these honorees and the tools with which they write for their successful efforts in using the written word to think, question, learn, challenge, respond, and connect. (This introduction was written by a human.)

The works below were written by first-year students in the Composition Program at the University of Massachusetts Boston, selected for publication by Composition Program faculty serving on the Undercurrents editorial board. Please see our Editor’s Introduction to learn more about our 2023 issue, click About the Journal to learn more about Undercurrents, or click the links below to enjoy our 2023 selections.

Jackelyne Abranches’s Who is Getting Left Out?: Breaking Down Language Barriers in Healthcare

“Language barriers have a significant impact on the quality of care a patient receives, particularly in a country where 64.7 million people speak another language other than English.”

Mahdi Almosawi’s The Future of AI in the Classroom

“The negatives AI brings to writing are just a side effect of change. It has not been adapted to yet, and when it is properly implemented into schools, it will become a very helpful tool for both teachers and students alike.”

Armani Dure’s The Practicalities of Code-Switching

“Even though we as people of color acknowledge that code-switching being a necessity is overall racist, I believe we do so anyway because it gives us an advantage.”

Maxine Freda’s Teachers are Encouraging Bullshit: A Response to Kylie Medieros

“Students are expected to present themselves as experts on whatever they are writing about, regardless of their credibility. This rhetorical move, inherently in itself, is bullshit, a total lie.”

Lynn-sarah Georges’s Do You Know Who You Are When You Write?

“They taught me that when I write I gotta be in the voice of a middle-aged white man, with racks in the bank, multiple estates, a successful business, and maybe some kids.”

Avery Knott’s Who are the “Chronically Online” and What Can They Teach Us About Public Discourse?

” Most of the average person’s waking hours are spent consuming information from an internet that is designed to parrot back one’s own ideas and thoughts, leading to a radicalization of thought that is disconcerting and widespread.

Madeline Murphy’s Life’s a Fashion Show (If You’re a Teenage Girl)

“Because the patriarchy demands that our bodies be left on an eternal display (for a never-blinking, never-ending audience of men), our clothes take center stage in the performance of teenage girlhood.”

Gavin Pereira Scoccia’s Schooling and its Effects on Neurodiverse Authority

“Creating an environment that actively dismisses the authority of neurodivergent students is a perpetuation of ableism. In almost all cases, it is not the neurodivergence of the student that contributes to their academic failure, but rather the academy itself.”

An Tran’s The Case Against the Five-Paragraph Essay

“With the Five-Paragraph formula, students have internalized that schools don’t actually care about what you have to say. We’ve accepted this after tireless usage of the format. We’ve had new ideas but have been told not to chase them.”

by Brian Coughlin

Brian Coughlin is a biology major from Melrose, MA. He believes that “everyone has the capacity to write something beautiful, but so many people are turned off of it because they think of some boring English essay they had to write about The Catcher in the Rye in eleventh grade.” Brian’s goal in this essay is to show that writing is “so much more than cracking open a thesaurus to impress your teacher.” This piece of writing is important to Brian because it was one of the first essays he wrote while trying to break away from the conventional writing standards. While writing, Brian says, “it felt ‘wrong’ to use more casual language because it didn’t FEEL academic. But I figured why not? If my points are all there, and the reader can understand them, why dress up as some scholar?” By developing a unique writing voice in his composition classes, Brian feels that he is now able to increase his presence in all types of writing. He is also relentlessly passionate about drawing and animals, and believes that drawing, like writing, is a fantastic outlet that “allows you to make something out of nothing that contains a style that just can’t be 100% replicated.”

---

“In the writings of Amicucci and Young, they both discuss a common theme of using your own voice in writing. Throughout this essay, I will be demonstrating how their ideas connect and support a main idea of intimidation around writing due to the way the education system is structured.” Well, that’s one way to start this paper. And honestly about a year ago I’d go that route. But fuck that. It’s boring, it’s borderline insulting to the reader, and I lose all my passion when writing like that. I’d bet that intro clicked for a lot of you though, bringing back the dread of writing high school essays. But that system they shoved down your throat is wrong. Plain and simple. Writing’s not as hard or as boring as you were taught it is, and I’m sure PLENTY of you would enjoy writing a hell of a lot more if you knew how freeing it could actually be.

Typing this out, it’s so easy for me to erase a word I type and replace it with a more “sophisticated” word. But honestly what’s the point? In forcing a voice I don’t naturally use, is it really even my voice? No. It takes a lot of unlearning, but writing becomes SO much easier when you’re not putting on a front. Don’t get me wrong, using filters (basically the way you present yourself in writing) in your paper has its benefits. But take it from Vershawn Ashanti Young, writer of a fascinating article called “Should Writers Use They Own English,” who says that “a whole lot of folk could be writin and speakin real, real smart if Fish and others stop using one prescriptive, foot-long ruler to measure the language of peeps who use a yardstick when they communicate” (Young 112). There’s a reason that 90% of us despised English class in high school and saved the essays until the last minute. And THAT’S the reason! People are intimidated by the “rules” of writing. Can I speak for everyone? No. But I can speak for myself when I say I was terrified of straying from the “rules” we were all taught about writing, and it’s because straying from these rules is often punished with a bad grade. No I’s, use big words, whatever. All these silly rules do is make people think they can’t write, or worse, it makes them resent writing. It feels like a chore rather than something you’re passionate about. That lack of passion comes DIRECTLY from us putting up a front to seem more professional than we probably are. So, what do you do when it comes to writing an essay? Just drop the act, man! Save it for your lab reports. Otherwise, what makes you stand out from the other five million generic essays? Your voice is something unique in writing and is something you NEED to utilize to its full potential, even if it’s scary to cross that line. But once you do, once you begin typing in your true authentic voice, you’ll find that the words will flow much easier.

Now, it’s easy to think, “Okay, maybe writing is good for SOME people, but not me.” And when you think of writing, I’m sure you think of big scholars, sitting on a chair by a fireplace while pipe smoking. But why do you think that? YOU write all the time, and you do great at it. You just don’t know it. Ann Amicucci, author of “Four Things Social Media Can Teach You About Writing — And One Thing It Can’t,” explains this idea well saying: “You might think of social media as completely separate from the writing you do for college, but the truth is, the two aren’t that different…the choices you make as a composer of text and images online are the same choices you need to make as a college writer” (Amicucci 18). Amicucci is saying that even if you don’t use social media, I’m sure you text. Or write letters. Or comment on posts. All of this IS writing, period, which shows how MUCH you really write without even thinking. It’s easy to be conditioned by English class to think that all of that’s not “important” writing. But why? You put as much, if not MORE, thought into your social media writing as your essays. You choose emojis, hashtags, word choice, which abbreviations to use, etc. It’s a lot of work! But we do it without even thinking, and you do it ALL the time. So why should an essay be any different?

Okay. Stop me if you’ve heard this one before. The Hamburger Method. Three paragraphs, intro/conclusion, maybe a Works Cited if your teacher made you. The five-paragraph essay. We ALL know it. And I don’t blame you if you think this is peak academic writing. This is something that’s drilled into our brains from middle school to the end of high school. And for a while, it feels like this is the only way to really write and sound smart. But the five-paragraph essay, plain and simple, DOESN’T WORK. Why doesn’t it though? All our teachers said it did! Well, this format certainly has a purpose. It’s great at forcing kids to dig through texts they don’t like, grab random quotes, and splash them on a paper. It’s less great at, y’know, actually teaching kids about writing. And it’s probably the reason so many of you detest writing. Who wouldn’t? If I thought that was the only way to write academically, I’d stop taking English classes at this point. But I want you to ask yourself what the five-paragraph essay does for you. Does it allow you to experiment? To risk? To try new things? To include your OWN voice, your OWN opinions, your OWN ideas? Or does it shove a prompt in your face and say, “good fucking luck”? Think about it. What can YOU insert into a five-paragraph writing that’s unique to YOU? You could shove quotes and summaries in all you want, but it’s still not your ideas. It’s spitting back out what’s thrown at you. But we all have opinions on the things we read. Could be good, bad, or maybe you really don’t care, but we ALL form some opinion on the content we consume. But you aren’t allowed to express that in a five-paragraph essay. Nope. Gotta get the right amount of quotes/word count! And the only consequence is ruining writing for countless students who could’ve been great writers. So yeah. Maybe that Hamburger Method you were taught isn’t all that foolproof.

So, I know you probably have a burning question: okay, I can write, and five-paragraph essays are flawed. Great! But…HOW do I write well? And it’s a solid question with a lot of different answers. But the main thing to consider, the thing I ALWAYS structure my papers around, is the audience. You’ve heard of audience; I’m sure you get the general idea of it. Audience is who you’re writing to. But do you ACTIVELY consider them in your paper? I’m sure you give it a glance, maybe add one or two things, but it’s CRUCIAL to appeal to your desired audience. Amicucci points to social media abbreviations, which directly appeal to an audience. She says: “Each language choice a writer makes marks that writer as an insider in some groups and an outsider in others — like if you’re a gamer who uses the acronym ftw, you might assume I’m a gamer, too” (Amicucci 22). Using the acronym “ftw” is a small inclusion in such a post, but it clicks with the intended audience. That intended audience can be anything — a professor, your peers, etc., but in this case, it’s gamers. So, what does this mean you should change your writer’s voice to appeal to an audience? NO! Young builds on this idea of writing for an audience, saying:

We hear that background in they speech, and it’s often expressed in they writin too. It’s natural (Coleman). But some would say, “You cant mix no dialects at work; how would peeps who aint from yo hood understand you?” They say, “You just gotta use standard English.” Yet, even folks with good jobs in the corporate world dont follow no standard English.” (Young 111)

Young is questioning here what counts as standard English and the criticism that people won’t understand unique dialects, a dialect essentially just being the way we write and say stuff. Young and Amicucci both share the same kinda mindset, being that an audience is signaled to by word choice. By writing in your own dialect, you signal to an audience. Like I said, it can be anyone. You can have a broad audience or a small group that you know will get it, but regardless, you write for SOMEONE. Think about it. We all use um’s and uh’s, say like, say totally, and any other goofy unprofessional word you can think of. Our audience GETS that. Is it appropriate in every situation? Maybe not. But that’s the fun in writing, you know? You try things out! It might work out. Or maybe you’ll get your paper back with a big-ass F. But why get discouraged by that? You’ll learn. You’ll know your audience better. You get to get up, try again, and take your mistakes into account. So, when you’re starting that paper, forget the prompt, forget the stress. Sit for a second and really question, who AM I writing for? And I think you’ll find a lot of that stress will start to dissipate.

So, the high school system is flawed, sure. But what can be done about it? Truthfully, I dunno. It’d be nice to live in a world where all students have the freedom to write in their own voice and exercise their creativity, but that’s not the world we live in. The school system in general tests such shallow abilities rather than a student’s intelligence. I guess my main issue with this is how it discourages students from writing. And I get that completely. Hell, if I didn’t take Comp in college, I’d stay away from writing, too. But we’re all bursting with differing ideas, opinions, and important things we wanna talk about. I think it’s important for students to know that you can do that. You don’t have to stick to some kind of formula for writing, because honestly, there isn’t one. Writing is scary. Seeing that blank paper is scary. Seeing that rubric is scary. But once you let it all go, once you clear your mind and begin typing in your voice rather than the one that’s taught to you, I think you’ll find you have a lot more to say than you realize.

Works Cited

Amicucci, Ann N. “Four Things Social Media Can Teach You About Writing — And One Thing It Can’t.” Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, vol. 4, edited by Dana Driscoll, Mary Stewart, and Matthew Vetter, Parlor Press, 2020, pp. 18-33.

Young, Vershawn Ashanti. “Should Writers Use They Own English?.” Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2010, pp. 110-117.

by Yelena Hernandez Bonilla

Yelena Hernandez Bonilla is a public health major from Chelsea, MA. As an undergraduate student, Yelena began reflecting on her school experience and noticed how much music has helped her “whether feeling happy, stressed, overwhelmed, or just needing a moment to unwind.” She decided to write this essay because she sees how important music is for many students. Apart from just listening to music, Yelena has played the piano and guitar for many years. Her music has served as a crucial outlet and has become “a major part of who I am because it is something I love and enjoy doing.” Yelena is passionate about helping her Latinx community, which is “why I have decided to major in public health.” She loves to travel and wants to work abroad in Central America in order to further explore her Salvadorean roots and give back to her community.

---

Imagine walking into the library on a college campus and seeing almost every single student have their headphones plugged in, listening to music, and really zoned into what they are doing. In college, this is something you’d see on an everyday basis. Whether it be on the bus, in the campus hallways, or even in class, students just can’t resist having their companion of music with them at all times. This unconscious agreement between students has been established; you know, the nonverbal exchange of I have my headphones on so that means I am in my own world type of agreement. But, as a college student myself, I know wearing headphones can also sound like this:

I have too many things on my mind, and I need to distract myself…

Entering the college journey is no easy task. Students are presented with unique challenges, juggling so many things all at once and somehow trying to act like you’ve got it all under control. Suddenly that excitement of, “I’m in college!” has transformed to, “ughhh, i’m in college.” New journeys present new difficulties, new feelings about the future, and in the midst of these changes many college students begin to emotionally feel these impacts. Suddenly, that anxious feeling in the pit of your stomach won’t seem to go away and every time you open your laptop to get work done it just ends up making you panic even more. So, you try to distract yourself to readily ignore all the warning signs your body has been giving you, but slowly it starts to catch up as time passes by.

As a college student, maintaining a healthy mindset and caring for mental health can be a challenging task to do. With so many things going on, students often forget to care about the most important thing, themselves. For some, that rush of academic motivation starts to fall away, and students are left wondering what would happen if they suddenly stopped trying. Last year, the American College Health Association (ACHA) conducted an assessment on college students and results showed that out of the 54,000 college students that were surveyed, “approximately 77% (of students) were experiencing moderate to serious psychological distress” (Bryant and Welding). That is a majority percentage, meaning that out of the 54,000 students that were surveyed, about 41,580 students were experiencing mental health difficulties. So, in the midst of all that frustration, what is something that students run to, in order to feel a place of expression? A place of comfort? A place of rest? Well…you can definitely find music to be one of the top strategies on the list of things that college students use to find that place.

Reflecting on this research, made me wonder: how does music connect to mental health for college students? I want to discover why music is such a popular choice among young people and what makes it so essential. To answer this, I conducted a survey directed to undergraduate college students, asking about their personal experiences with music. For this research, I wanted to focus both on students who play instruments and students who may not play instruments but do listen to music on a daily basis. In the survey, I asked students if listening to music often helps them feel understood. 12 out of the 14 students agreed that this statement was true for them (Hernandez Bonilla). So, one reason students may be choosing to listen to music is because it allows them to express feelings that may be hard to communicate with others. Let’s face it, being vulnerable is something that as a young adult, can be scary. Alexandra Frost, a journalist from the Jed Foundation, a nonprofit organization that aims to help young adults care for their mental health, writes that “if you don’t have the words to explain what you are going through, or if you don’t feel comfortable talking about it, song lyrics can give you another way to express your feelings” (Frost). If we look at music lyrics, many artists share moments of being in the middle of a difficult time in their lives.

Let’s look at one song, called “i’m here” by Abbie Gamboa. In her song she opens up by saying:

Tired, I’ve felt that before
Overwhelmed, I know the one
Acquainted with the deepest grief
Anxious, when your heart skips a beat
When peace becomes fleeting
I know what you’re feeling

Whether it be ending a relationship with someone, feelings of rejection, or just going through the process of discovering who you are, artists can share these moments through their songs. For college students, these types of songs may correlate to what they are experiencing and make them feel seen and heard. But someone out there might be wondering, why would you want to make yourself feel sad by surrounding yourself with more emotional melodies and sad songs? Wouldn’t that just make you feel more miserable?

Well, after doing some research, I encountered some interesting findings. One of them relates to music theory, which if you play instruments, you will get this, but if not, just hold on! Here’s a small introduction to Music 101; there exist notes which are the sounds that our ears perceive when a musical key is played. Generally, there are major notes and minor notes. Major notes usually mean happy notes, and minor notes can be referred to as the emotional mellow notes. So, as musicians we know that to invoke emotions, one of the best ways to do so will be through some type of minor scale or even just using one or two minor chords in your musical composition.

Interestingly enough, a study was done by research scientists Ai Kawakami and colleagues, who specialize in music and emotion to observe this very part of musical interpretation. Participants were observed while listening to music pieces that were played in minor keys to see how they felt after listening to those melodies. The result of the study showed that “although dissonance and melody in a minor key were perceived as unpleasant sounds, listeners actually felt fewer unpleasant and more pleasant emotions when listening to these musical stimuli” (Kawakami et al. 2). Basically, what their research is saying, in a simplified version, is that when participants listened to sad-toned music they experienced fewer negative reactions and more positive, calming feelings. Now, who would ever think that listening to sad music could cause this reaction? We can also look at research done by Devrim Osmanoglu and Hüseyin Yilmaz at Kafkas University who study the effect of classical music on anxiety and well-being of university students. Osmanoglu and Yilmaz echo the same positive experience with music by saying: “It is not our hearing power that makes music compositions pleasing to us, but our ability to comprehend various inspirations from that composition” (Osmanoglu and Yilmaz 19). So, it’s not necessarily just listening to music that helps people, it’s grabbing a meaning and interpretation from what they are listening to. If tuning into that sad song can help students feel understood, then it will cause a more calming and reassuring reaction for them. Taking that simple melody or song, just as the one mentioned above, “i’m here” by Gamboa, and relating it to our experiences and feelings, creates a deeper meaning. In music, people experience a personalized connection to what they are hearing and can find a safe place within a melody or song.

But music choice can vary from person to person which is something great about music because it allows people to create their own unique way of discovering what interests one might have. One pattern I observed in my survey was that many students continuously mentioned that they listen to slow-paced songs, such as R&B and classical music. Now this made me wonder, could genre possibly impact people’s mental health? Continuing on the research done on by Osmanoglu, students were asked to listen to classical music regularly for 60 days and the results showed that listening to this type of music “reduced anxiety levels and increased subjective well-being levels” (Osmanoglu 22). If we think about beats and timings in music, we know that it’s key for the formation of a song.

A song is carried out by the rhythm that it has to follow. Let’s think of a moment that most of us have experienced. When we listen to that really fast-paced song with the intense drums and crazy bass line, almost automatically, it causes that rush of energy to flow through the body. You just can’t seem to resist moving your foot to the beat and tapping your fingers along to it. This type of music is great for helping you feel motivated and ready for the day. Thinking of these moments, we can see how music can create both an emotional and physical reaction to what we hear. Looking at some genres of music most listened to by college students, R&B, Indie, and even classical music are interestingly the most commonly listed (Hernandez Bonilla). For students who may feel engulfed in so many thoughts, deadlines, and responsibilities, it might feel like a moment to unwind would be much needed. One way to find this could be by listening to slower, more relaxing music. These genres of music provide an outlet of relaxation for the person’s mind and without realizing it, students are choosing songs to help their mental health.

Now, if we know that students listen to music daily, this must mean that while doing homework or even studying, music can be essential. I think about my experiences, and how I cannot go into a study session without having some type of music in the background. If many students do this, could this mean that music is an impacting factor of learning in academics? Theresa Schempp, from the University of Maryland, wrote an article that talks about the benefits of using music to study. She describes how “the right choice of music, such as instrumental or ambient music, can help block out distractions, improve concentration, and maintain attention during study sessions” (Schempp). To do well in academics, we know that preparation is key to mastering subjects on difficult concepts. By creating an organized and calm study session, academic performance will be drastically improved. So, music can play an important role in this process by blurring out distractions that could be happening around the student and making them focus on what they need to learn.

Specifically, for students who play instruments, additional skills can also be a benefit in academics. If we look at one of the most popular pathways college students like to take, which is the pre-medical path, many of those classes are rigorously challenging. Looking at healthcare professionals that made their way through college and additional schooling, interestingly enough, many of them have the skill of playing an instrument in common. When COVID-19 was at its peak back in 2020, medical professionals reunited through the online platform Zoom to play a musical composition together. One participant, Dr. Erica Hardy, talks about her personal experience with music and recounts that at just 4 years old she began her music journey. She reflects on this and says: “Many of us have been musicians longer than we’ve been doctors or scientists or nurses” (qtd. in “Meet the Medical Professionals”). If we think about the journey of becoming a doctor, nurse or any other healthcare professional, persistence, focus and adaptability are vital skills. We’re talking sometimes even 10+ years of school for some, which is a lot of school. So, if we see that many of these professionals began playing instruments at a young age, this can correlate to developing crucial skills that have allowed them to learn how to excel in school and in studying habits.

Applying this to any college student that may play instruments, the benefits are really endless. For example, when I first learned how to play guitar, it was one of the most difficult things to do because it was something that I had to learn from scratch. Even though at times frustrations arose and moments of giving up waved over me, I knew it was a personal goal that I had. Consistency was key to learning my instrument, and challenging myself to memorize chords was something that I had to teach myself to do. Applying that persistence to academics, students who have experienced similar moments to mine can take that adeptness of learning new materials and use those skills to improve their performance in academics. In the survey I conducted, 100% of students who play instruments said they have the skill of multitasking and 75% said that they have the skill of being able to concentrate on completing tasks. I believe that through the process of learning an instrument, students have been able to develop vital practices and experiences that they can apply to the academic world.

In both emotional and academic aspects, music for college students is a vital part of their day-to-day lives. Now, the next time you listen to music just remember all of these benefits. Music can create a calming effect for the mind and help in managing stress and mental health difficulties. If you’re a college student yourself, make sure you take time to wind down and give yourself a break by plugging into the world of music and disconnecting for a moment from all the craziness that comes along with navigating the world as a young adult. I think about my personal experiences and how listening to music is one of my favorite ways to pass time and just check in with myself by letting my mind ease away into the rhythms and melodies of what I am listening to. Like other students, music, to me, is therapeutic and alleviating for the heart and mind. No matter the age, location, or language, music can always squeeze itself through and connect to anyone. It goes beyond what we can say in simple words and creates an outlet to release everything we can be feeling.

Works Cited

Bryant, Jessica, and Lyss Welding. “College Student Mental Health Statistics.” BestColleges.com. 15 Feb 2023.

Frost, Alexandra. “How Music Can Improve Your Mental Health.” The Jed Foundation. 12 May 2023.

Gamboa, Abbie. “I’m Here (Audio) – Abbie Gamboa.” YouTube, 19 May 2023.

Hernandez Bonilla, Yelena. “Music and Mental Health” Google Survey. November 2023.

Kawakami, Ai, et al. “Music Evokes Vicarious Emotions in Listeners.” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 5, 2014, pp. 431–431, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00431.

“Meet The Medical Professionals Playing Classical Music Together Online.” Weekend Edition Saturday, NPR, 2020.

Osmanoglu, Devrim Erginsoy, and Hüseyin Yilmaz. “The Effect of Classical Music on Anxiety and Well-Being of University Students.” International Education Studies, vol. 12, no. 11, 2019, pp. 18-25. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n11p18.

Schempp, Theresa, and Sanders, Mike. “How Music Can Help You Study: UMGC.” University of Maryland Global Campus. 28 Aug 2023.

by Reese Smith

Reese Smith is a nursing major from Quincy, MA. She says that she has come to realize how as a society we have very little comfort in our everyday lives and “often live a robotic lifestyle day in and day out, without taking much time to appreciate what is around us and incorporating comforts into our daily routines.” When writing this essay, Reese felt that she was able to take her own research and apply it to her daily life by taking time to infiltrate comforts (with an “s”) into her own routines. Her research is special to her since it stems from her interest in biophilic design and explores the extreme incorporation of comfort into a home or workspace. Comfort in the workplace is important to Reese as a nursing major who knows she will be “dealing with patients and families in what could be the most uncomfortable times of their lives.” She is passionate about taking care of people and hopes that she can “learn of people’s differences, what makes them comfortable, and how to provide care for them.”

---

Ugh!! You just failed your exam. Crashed your car. Checked your bank account to be greeted by a very low number. Found out your family is visiting this summer for a month and staying in your house, demoting you to the family living room couch.

All of these are very real and human experiences that have the person experiencing intense emotions that cause them to take a step back and say, “What the hell do I do now?” Your mind begins to scramble. How am I going to respond at this moment? How am I going to handle this information when I already have so many things on my plate? What did I do to deserve this?

Sheer panic.

Now, you can totally take out this emotion on someone or something else. Calling your little brother telling him that he needs to forfeit his room for grandma instead of yours. Your decision, no judgment here. But the most, for lack of a better term, mature way to go about this situation is to evaluate how you feel and go about trying to calm yourself down. For some people this seems easy, wipe the sweat off your temple and resort to what works to calm you down. For others, it may have you encountering the question from before, “What the hell do I do now?”

Why as a society do we separate ourselves from our comforts in our everyday lives? It sometimes gets to a point that people are so detached from what brings them comfort that they do not even know what to do in times of strong emotion. Even for the people that know what to resort to when they are met with these difficult times, why do they keep these tools separated from everyday practice? Why do we only refer to these practices in times of severe stress and emotion?

If you read those last few statements and are scratching your head while saying, “what is she getting at?” Let me explain it to you. The idea that led me to ask myself the questions previously mentioned was “biophilic design.” You might be saying, “what did she just say?” Space Refinery’s blog post, “Everything You Need to Know About Biophilic Design,” gives a rundown of what biophilic design is and how it is being used today. Biophilic design is basically including plants and greenery around your living and workspaces to create the illusion that you are outside, when truly you are not, in order to promote a more comforting environment. This is a new design that is being pushed in a lot of new workspaces due to the benefits of “reduced stress levels, increased productivity, a reduction in sick days and absenteeism, higher attractivity for job candidates, reduced pollution and cleaner air, lower noise levels, creativity boost” (“Everything You Need”). This does not just mean including one potted plant in the common area, but really incorporating plants all over homes and workspaces. For some people they may not find greenery to be comforting, but the way in which biophilic design elevates workspaces proves the benefits, and how it can be helpful, for everyone.

Learning about the comforts of biophilic design made me question, why are we just introducing ideas like this now? Even though these ideas are being publicized, they are being largely ignored and swept under the carpet. It has predominantly been believed that work should not be comfortable but a place of productivity. Sounds a little inhuman to me, prison-like if you will. Why are we conditioned to believe that comforts increase laziness, when in fact it may increase efficiency?

Now would be a good time to define what I mean when I say “comforts.” Yes, the whole time I have been saying comforts (with the “s”) on purpose. The Oxford Dictionary defines comfort (without the “s”) as, “a state of physical ease and freedom from pain or constraint.” Yes, that is the correct definition for comfort, but what about comforts (with the “s”)? Personally, I view comforts to be anything that relieves you from stress or other strong emotions. This could include a person, group of people, object, place, or activity, the options are infinite. The only requirement is that it puts YOUR mind to ease. When I asked my peers to fill out a survey I made about comforts, most people listed that theirs include going outside, spending time with family and friends, watching TV, video games, cooking…the list was pretty much endless (Smith). This is because many people have more than one comfort; as mentioned before, these are tools that are completely engineered to help you get past tough situations and strong emotion.

Okay, so let’s get more into what comforts actually are. Personally, I believe that they are typically broken down into two classes: physical and emotional comforts. Do not let this confuse you since what they mean is pretty obvious due to the name. Physical comforts include anything that you actually do: activities, napping, going for a walk, etc. Emotional comforts are when you have an attachment to a certain item or place, when using that item or going to that place you feel comfort. Some people may only have one type of comfort, and others may have comforts that fall under both categories. In the end they do not have large differences, but it makes it easier to talk about comforts when we can categorize them. The type of comfort someone uses does not have a large impact since they eventually do the same thing, creating peace of mind.

Here is another example of physical and emotional comforts in a real-life situation. Illustrated in “The Sadness of Lives and the Comfort of Things,” Darach Turley and Stephanie O’Donohoe focus on the life of a widow tracing the daily life choices that helped her mourn the new loss of her husband. Within the article the authors highlight this to show the reader that “The objects and places associated with her late husband marked out…that things can confront as well as comfort us” (Turley and O’Donohoe 1345-46). Obviously, losing someone in your life is a very highly emotional experience that a lot of people are not prepared to deal with. As seen in this scenario, in order for the widow to continue her daily life, she found comfort in carrying around some of her late husband’s belongings and leaving his items around the house. When going about her life, like going to work or the store, if a sudden wave of emotion struck her, she would have the objects to help to calm her down. By doing so, it allowed her to be productive with the requirements of life as well as being tranquil with the loss of her husband. Yes, this is a very morbid example, but it is also very real. However, this is a perfect way of illustrating how certain objects from life experiences can help us to move past the coming tribulations that are thrown our way.

Is it reasonable to have a persons’ comforts infiltrated into everyday life while still having time for all of the happenings of life? That is for you to decide. Yes, some peoples’ comforts may be more complex and time consuming than others, but does that really matter? For example, someone might find comfort in taking a long walk outside while another person finds comfort in playing with a fidget. Although everyone has differences in what calms them down, I believe that it is important to take a step back and embrace these comforts in order to clear the mind so one can, in the end, be more productive.

Think of this scenario. You just walked in the front door of the building that you work in. You hear your phone chime and look down to see a text from your mother. She has just informed you that something urgent came up and she does not have the time to come visit you on your birthday. You instantly feel your heart sink into your stomach, but you have an eight-hour shift still ahead of you. What do you do? Continue to go up to your desk and try to get your work done while having this news lingering in your mind, preventing you from getting much done? Or do you let your boss know that you need to take your lunch break early in order to clear your mind so you can actually get your work done? Essentially, the choice is yours, but I do believe it is clear which will have the most benefit emotionally and work wise.

So… why is it that we leave the use of our comforts until we reach our breaking point? Shouldn’t we just include our comforts in our daily routine to prevent breakdowns? The answer seems pretty obvious but why does this seem peculiar in our society? I believe the disconnect lies within the (great or not-so great?) American culture. Adam Gopnik, an American writer, wrote an essay on the subject of busyness and what that means for him, and his family, while living in New York City. In his essay, Gopnik writes, “We are instructed to believe that we are busier because we have to work harder to be more productive, but everybody knows that busyness and productivity have a dubious, arm’s-length relationship.” By saying that busyness and productivity have an arms-length relationship, he is saying that people believe that busyness and productivity are often the same thing. However, as proven through his essay, if one is focused on being busy, productivity usually falters. Busyness and comforts may seem like a juxtaposition and a waste of time to compare, to you, but that just shows how you have been shaped by society to think that way. Why can they not be compared? I do not know, and I bet that you do not have a valid argument stating that the two are not related. I can explain just how closely related the two really are.

Busyness (sigh), unfortunately, has become a large portion of American culture to a point that the average American citizen identifies as a “workaholic”. This is the root of the problem that I am addressing; why are our comforts separate from daily activities? No, I am not saying that this is only seen in people that DO work a lot, it can be seen in anyone, due to this money-hungry lifestyle that a lot of people live, and it is unknowingly implemented into our lifestyle routines. We are used to burning the candle at both ends. This can be directly related to why we feel as if we have no time to include our comforts. Most people are improperly disciplined to believe that any spare time we have should be spent working. So, when we often have extra time left on our plate, we tend to do what we know best — continue working.

The issue with this is that we often do not confront emotions or other experiences that we are dealing with outside of work and responsibilities. This way of thinking causes us to push spending personal time to the side, along with the extra time it may take to incorporate comforts. Think of the saying “American Dream”. It sounds really awesome when you say it, but to learn that the truth behind it is that you sacrifice everything you have, although it may not be a lot, to come to America and make a life for yourself? What does this process look like? Working all the time, going to school, struggling to afford food for yourself and family, all while being in a completely different cultural environment. So, why have we allowed this place that we call home to be a trademark for hard work? I do not know the answer and that is exactly why I am proposing these questions to you.

Okay so back to the topic of comforts. Yes, busyness and the “work all the time” persona that American culture has embodied plays a large role in why we draw a fine line between ourselves and what brings us comfort. It is almost like Uncle Sam is saying, “why would you have fun and make yourself comfortable when you can work all the time? Money is the only real comfort.” However, that is very far off from the truth, and we can tell Uncle Sam he needs a reality check. Obviously, Uncle Sam did not say that, but that is the idea the American Dream persona creates.

Now we are going to totally switch gears and include another vital part of comforts and the role that they play in the development of children. I believe that for most people it is a common sight to see a child walking down the street with one hand in their guardian’s, and the other gripping onto a toy of some sort like their life depends on it. Isn’t this a prime example of including a comfort in everyday life that a lot of people can relate to? In “The Strong Bond Between Children and Comfort Objects,” Joanne Lewis highlights how, for some children, having a comfort item is very beneficial for their transition to independence. Some of the benefits listed for these comfort objects include how they:

Help children relax and get to sleep, are companions that children can talk to, sleep alongside, and share experiences, provide reassurance when children are separated from their parents, e.g. at bedtime or childcare, provide comfort when children are frightened or upset, help children feel secure in unfamiliar environments by providing a link between a new situation and the comfort of home. (Lewis)

So… you can probably tell where I am going from here. Why is it so hard to allow ourselves to push life aside for a moment and incorporate comforts into our routine when doing so was very crucial for our development? Yes, it might be strange if every adult started carrying around babydolls, toy trucks, and pacifiers but…what works for you, works for you.

Now, let’s not ignore that when a child gives up their comfort object it is a huge turning point in their development. It is a switch from dependency to independence. So, yes this is technically very important that we still do not cling onto the same item we did when we were toddlers. However, could this practice be reintroduced in other stages of our life and development? Take this as an example: if we were to have a very stressful period of time when all seemed to be failing us, perhaps we got into the habit of carrying a fidget toy around wherever we pleased. In times when we felt the stress spike, we would play with the fidget. As time went on and we started to feel better and recover from this trying time, we felt ourselves leaving behind this object and depending on it less. Seems like this practice can still be used, on a less child-esque level.

So…why as we got older, did we not get in the habit to replace this comfort? Yes, comfort items from childhood age out, but could we transfer that need of comfort in our routine to something more realistic and compatible to our lives and responsibilities? Would the role of a comfort item or practice produce more benefits throughout teenage and adult years? The questions are endless, but they all come down to one word, why? Why did we stop this practice? Why have we made it weird in our society? Why do we only resort to our comforts in severe moments of stress and breaking points?

It is easy to be severely negative when focused on this topic, as you can see from reading my paper. However, there are changes that are being made throughout society that are definitely a step in the right direction. In “Providing Quiet Spaces In the Wide-Open Workplace,” Priyanka Dayal McCluskey, a reporter for The Boston Globe, focused on workspaces and what they are doing to provide for their employees during work hours so they can take a step away and enjoy quiet spaces. Through her observations McCluskey includes many examples of what current businesses are doing, as well as what Todd Dundon, a principal at the Boston Architecture and Design firm, had to say when he observed that “companies are getting more sophisticated and understand the need to provide spaces that attract and retain talent. . . . The key is choice and providing the right balance.” The correlation between attracting talent and obtaining it through balance is very important to highlight. By providing these spaces for employees, it allows for them to step away for a few minutes and return with a clear mind to their work. This, as mentioned before, promotes success in addressing our emotions to allow for productivity.

Yes, it is important that changes are being made by businesses, yet it is not the most likely that many corporations are willing to do this. When I asked my peers, 30% said that their work and/or school provided them the space and time to embrace their comforts. Only 13% of them felt as if they were at work and overcome with severe stress that they would feel comfortable resorting to their comforts. Additionally, 26% of respondents said they would feel comfortable at school resorting to comforts (Smith). Why are these numbers so low? Why have we made it atypical to have an outlet for emotional release in our routines at work and/or school? What can we do to change this?

In “Comfort, Well-Being and Quality of Life,” a group of medical professionals came together to talk about how comfort is directly related to a person’s quality of life. As mentioned in their article, “The Oxford Dictionary defines ‘well-being’ as ‘the state of being comfortable, healthy, or happy,’” highlighting the fact that you cannot describe and promote a person’s well-being if you do not make them comfortable (Pinto et al. 7). By knowing that information, it is important to take in our daily practices and evaluate if we are promoting our own well-being and if we could improve it by including comforts, which is what I have been getting at all along.

It is a good feeling to know that we are headed in the right direction, but you may be feeling like you do not know where to go from here. That is okay, since there is no real answer. If you step away from this article while retaining any information, I will hope you are walking away brainstorming a list of ways to incorporate your very own comforts into your daily life. There are many changes that need to be made socially, but it all begins with what you do yourself in order to step away and breathe from the complexities of life. Read a book. Ride a bike. Write in a journal. The decision is yours.

Works Cited

“Comfort.” Oxford Dictionary (2010). Oxford University Press.

“Everything You Need to Know about Biophilic Design.” Space Refinery, 8 Mar. 2024.

Gopnik, Adam. “Bumping Into Mr. Ravioli” The New Yorker, 23 Sept. 2002.

Lewis, Joanne. “The Strong Bond Between Children and Comfort Objects.” Care for Kids, Care for Kids Group Pty Ltd, 21 June 2023.

McCluskey, Priyanka Dayal. “Providing Quiet Spaces in the Wide-Open Workplace.” BostonGlobe.Com, The Boston Globe, 17 Nov. 2016.

Pinto, Sara, et al. “Comfort, Well-Being and Quality of Life: Discussion of the Differences and Similarities Among the Concepts.” Porto Biomedical Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, 2017, pp. 6-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbj.2016.11.003.

Smith, Reese. “Comforts Survey” Google Survey. March 27, 2024.

Turley, Darach, and Stephanie O’Donohoe. “The Sadness of Lives and the Comfort of Things: Goods as Evocative Objects in Bereavement.” Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 28, no. 11-12, 2012, pp. 1331-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2012.691528.

by Anh Tran

Anh Tran is a psychology major and an English minor from Boston MA. Anh loves drawing and believes that it is beautiful how “there are so many ways you can paint a blank canvas to send a message to others.” She was excited to have the creative freedom that she wanted to deliver this essay in her composition class. For her project she “knew right then and there that I wanted to take advantage of my artistic skills to educate my peers in a way that was familiar to me: videos essays with drawn characters.” Anh enjoys video essays from writers that have clear passion in the topic they are writing and researching about. She believes that “there is charm with these two things, as they express the individual’s interest through both thought and creativity. Not just the taught material, but how they deliver it.” It is this combination of delivery and subject matter that makes Anh excited to learn from her professors and other students.

---

Works Cited

Brooke, Collin Gifford. “The Passive Voice Should Be Avoided.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, Digital Publishing Institute and West Virginia University Libraries, 2017, pp. 139-143.

by An Tran

An Tran is a double major in finance and psychology from Boston, MA. An notes that she came from an “underfunded elementary school” where “the curriculum has been rooted in standardized tests, and preparing for them in order to bring in funding.” Given that, she argues that “our value, as students, has become less about the investment of an upcoming generation and more about how much money we could bring in from our test scores.” An notes that the five-paragraph essay “is a core component of this pattern, and it hinders students from truly learning the craft of writing.” She writes leaving behind the five-paragraph essay structure was freeing, and that she “wasn’t suffocated and forced into a mold or to write in a certain way.” An is passionate about people: she loves writing to create an experience for someone else and to bridge a connection with others. An also writes poems for others in Boston Common in her free time.

---

When forced into using the same writing strategy over and over again, could students learn how to become better writers? Shirley Rose, a professor of composition at Arizona State University, has developed a theory that writing is a continual learning process, in that each writing context has something to teach you. From Rose’s theory, the answer is a resounding no, students do not become better writers simply practicing the same strategy. As Rose states, “[the] same writing habits and strategies will not work in all writing situations. There is no such thing as “writing in general”; therefore, there is no one lesson about writing that can make writing good in all contexts” (60) With all writing situations being unique, it is impossible to have the same strategy be tailored for every possible scenario; a one size fits all solution won’t cut it. A single strategy will force students to think in a cookie-cutter format and limit their potential to wield writing as a tool that would benefit them. To become better writers, students must be introduced to new writing situations and adapt to using new writing strategies. Doing so will strengthen students’ ability to think critically and write effectively for each scenario.

Let me demonstrate with a common example. How many times have you heard a wedding speech start with some variation of “Merriam Webster defines love as…” along with some cheesy phrase at the end of it. A common strategy, isn’t it? Almost so common that a wedding wouldn’t be complete without the utterance of that phrase. Let’s say you had Great Aunt Tessie’s funeral to attend, and Cousin Dan is asking you to come up and deliver some loving words. Can you imagine if you came up and said, “Merriam Webster defines death as..” paired with some weird anecdote of Great Aunt Tessie? You can kiss that inheritance goodbye! I mean, hello, read the room. Now, think about this method for your college essays. You would apply the same opener, the same format, and the same tone for every piece, regardless of the prompt or the class it called for. Every essay would become redundant, and the effectiveness of the strategy is gone.

This all, however, is theoretical. To really find out if using the same strategy is feasible and productive for learning, let’s examine the Five-Paragraph Essay (FPE). The five-paragraph essay taught in elementary and high schools, is a distinctly marked essay writing technique with an introduction, three body paragraphs, and a conclusion that restates the thesis. Bruce Bowles, theorist and researcher on composition at Texas A&M, describes this method as a product of “assessment washback” (221). With assessment washback, instead of teaching what a normal curriculum should look like, teachers resort to teaching students how to take tests and more importantly, score well on them. The five-paragraph essay is a hallmark of standardized testing, as it makes grading easy for testing companies and provides an assurance that, if done properly, a student would receive a high score. Its popularity in curriculums has established the format to be the high school student’s go-to essay strategy. The virus of the five-paragraph essay has spread outside of the test room and has crept into the homework assignments and essays. Students have begun to use this format over and over again in response to every prompt and for every class.

While marketed as a strong default approach, the five-paragraph essay actually hurts a student’s quality of writing as it doesn’t allow students to think critically about their work. As Bowles puts it in his essay, the five-paragraph theme:

Imparts a hollow, formulaic notion of writing to students that emphasizes adherence to generic features rather than focusing on the quality of content, informed research practices, effective persuasive techniques, and attention to the specific contexts in which students will compose. (221)

Students rely on hitting all the structural criteria in the five-paragraph essay and neglect to think about the rhetoric of their work, their argument, or include skillful thinking. This formula has become a crutch that’s allowed students to become blind to their work, prioritizing quantity over quality. Rose demonstrates the theory of continual learning in writing, and Bowles executes these ideas as he explains how the five-paragraph essay prevents learning and growth as a whole.

Let’s take a look at an example student, Katie, who is working on an essay for school. Because modern-day school curriculums revolve around standardized test preparation, the essays assigned to students will often look the same way as tests would: with a hallmark oversaturated topic, such as abortion, death penalty, or dress code, and a strong emphasis on the FPE. So, in this case, Katie will be writing an essay arguing the death penalty. Katie, like many other students in high school, relies on the five-paragraph essay formula to pull her through this assignment. See her diagram below.

Katie will plug her ideas into this formula and apply the “generic features” she was taught to create this perfect amalgamation of public-school blandness. She might use strategies like a basic hook such as “Did you know?” or include some vague scenario, then neglect that same hook until the last paragraph where she might mention it once or twice, as an attempt to “tie it all together.” If you look closely at the diagram, you may notice that the body paragraphs only really have room for topic sentences, evidence, and analysis. The evidence most likely comes from the same source that was provided by the teacher, so naturally, everyone in the class is using the same evidence. After that, it’s not hard to even have some of the same arguments and analyses. In fact, Katie’s argument not only sounds like the many other students in the class, but you can almost mistake them for any argument pulled from a generic online search. With a formula like this, it would be incredibly difficult to add substance or depth to your argument. Look again at the five-paragraph essay diagram. There is no room for counterarguments, personal evaluations, connections to current events, or any nuances that give your writing power. The special thing about Katie is that she has an uncle that’s been incarcerated in the U.S prison system. Her perspective on criminal justice would be critical in an argument like this, but there is no space for her thoughts in the formula. So, for fear of losing points, she didn’t bother contributing her insight. “It doesn’t matter, anyway. This essay doesn’t include me,” Katie thinks. Instead, she focuses on hitting all the structural points: introduction, three body paragraphs, and conclusion. She turns the paper in. She gets an A in exchange for her ideas to remain unheard.

With the five-paragraph essay, writing has become gamified. Students like Katie use the formula to play “how many points can I get if I write an introduction, three body paragraphs, and a conclusion?” Internal questions spur such as, “How many more points will I get if I use big words I don’t really understand? What if I use a hook? What if I restate my thesis in the conclusion?” drive her thinking. You are no longer earning points for your work – you’re winning them for your obedience. Andrea Lunsford, editor, and English professor at Stanford University, discusses how writing is performative in many situations. “Writers interact with, address, invoke, become and create audiences,” and writing is used to declare events, create change, and to inspire knowledge (21). With this, the five-paragraph essay clearly demonstrates how students are performing for a grade. The formula has transformed the study of writing from a practice of a critical tool into a thoughtless vehicle for an A.

The effects of the five-paragraph essay damage not only the quality of the work but limits the scope of one’s learning. In fact, the five-paragraph essay has encouraged students to stop learning altogether. Students have stopped differentiating new writing situations they are put in, and in turn, have stopped using new strategies. Rose illustrates the same concept when she states that “writers must struggle to write in new contexts and genres, a matter of transferring what they know but also learning new things about what works in the present situation” (60). It is critical for a student to struggle in a new writing situation to learn and benefit from using new strategies. Every writing situation has its nuances and quirks. So, a student’s strategy may apply well to one situation, but cannot be recycled for another. For example, a student that applies the five-paragraph essay for an English class about Shakespeare would be making a poor decision to apply the same format to their scientific paper for Biology. The introduction, three body paragraphs, and conclusion will not be appropriate for your lab report, and more than that, would lose your credibility. Therefore, when students use the same format for each essay and constantly recycle, they do themselves a disservice. They don’t practice new writing. It is merely a rehearsal of old strategies. This expression of bland uniformity is where the beauty of writing gets lost.

Students need to know that this “beauty of writing” is that learning is never ending. Rose eloquently states, “one of the first lessons writers learn, one that may be either frustrating or inspiring, is that they will never have learned all that can be known about writing and will never be able to demonstrate all they do know about writing” (59). While writers will not be able to know everything about writing, the best they can do is to understand the situation they’re writing for and learn more about it. The most skillful writers are the ones who are the most willing to learn. Realizing that writing is a lifelong learning experience has given me room to breathe and opportunities to grow. It is okay to be imperfect in my writing because imperfection is a requirement; imperfection is what leads us to learn. Chasing perfection would simply be foolish.

As a college student that has recognized the beauty of such writing, I am heartbroken to see the effects of the five-paragraph essay on students today. It must be impossible to try to embrace a practice that’s only been regarded as a way to achieve test scores. It must be impossible to love something that feels so mechanical and formulaic. More than that, however, it must be hard to not truly be able to express your most unique ideas.

With the five-paragraph essay formula, students have internalized that schools don’t actually care about what you have to say. What they’re prioritizing is the structure of your essay and if you’ve met all the points. There is no room for creativity in a formula. What’s more tragic is that we’ve accepted this after tireless usage of the format. We have had new ideas but have been told not to chase them.

We’ve strayed from writing. Real-ass writing. Writing that someone gives a fuck about. We must unlearn traditional and non-helpful practices that have come from “assessment washback” (Bowles 221). When we are able to truly think and internalize our arguments, using all of our resources and potential, it is then that we may use writing as a tool to change minds. It is then that writing has power. Understanding the origins of these writing constraints will help students break free from them and produce more organic writing.

On a larger scope, we, as college students, must take action and change the school systems that have failed us. Bowles suggests that to eradicate the reliance on standardized testing and “assessment washback,” schools should use local school assessments and GPA for funding (224). Rose advocates for the practice of continually putting students into new writing situations to learn and grow (61). By merging Bowles’ ideals of a new format for the school system and Rose’s approach to writing, students can think more deeply about their own writing practices, reflect on them, and improve. If we don’t fix our school systems, let us mourn the death of critical thinking, free-flowing ideas, and quality and sound arguments in the essays our students write.

Works Cited

Rose, Shirley. “All Writers Have More to Learn.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, edited by Linda Adler-Kassner, Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, an imprint of University Press of Colorado, 2015. 

Bowles, Bruce. “The Five Paragraph Theme Teaches Beyond the Test.” Bad Ideas About Writing, edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, West Virginia University Libraries Digital Publishing Institute, 2017, 231-235. 

Lunsford, Andrea. “Writing Is Performative.” Naming What We Know: Threshold Concepts of Writing Studies, edited by Linda Adler-Kassner, Elizabeth Wardle, Utah State University Press, an imprint of University Press of Colorado, 2015. 

by Gavin Pereira Scoccia

Gavin Pereira Scoccia is a biology major and anthropology minor from Brookline, MA. While writing this essay Gavin says, “I was so upset at the education system for not giving me, or my neurodivergent peers, a chance.” Gavin shares that he was diagnosed with ADHD at a young age but “never got accommodations despite needing them, leading me to fail in school.” Gavin often believed that he was lazy, did not try hard, and was simply not good enough, and he believes that schools often let students down because they have preconceived notions about what makes a “good student.” He was lucky enough to find teachers who took the time to “work with me and taught me skills that came naturally to other students. I thrived under those teachers’ care.” Gavin says that this essay “is a manifestation of my rage as a neurodivergent person.” Gavin has also been advocating for animal rights since elementary school. He works in the veterinary field and sees the joys that animals bring to everyone in their lives. He strives to make those animals’ lives just as joyful and healthy as possible.

---

The ability to have confidence in our own ideas is a skill that becomes increasingly important as we progress through our lives. It allows us to communicate our thoughts effectively and gain confidence, which is valued in academia and the workforce. Generally, this skill is called authority. We start cultivating it at a young age, and it grows with us. Yet some are encouraged more than others to express their thoughts, causing a societal discrepancy. This is a never-ending cycle where the favored group remains the most vocal while the minorities have their thoughts dismissed. This phenomenon occurs at nearly every intersection of power in our lives. It is well documented how the effects of racism and sexism can affect the authority. But the exploration of this topic for several minority groups still remains underexplored. One such example is the effects of ableism on authority in the case of neurodivergent students.

If you were to present an idea to a class of students and ask them what they thought, you would find that each of their answers would be unique. That is, only if all the students had a well-developed sense of authority. In reality, it is much more likely that the students would remain quiet, or let a few people speak for the class. The confidence to interpret an idea and speak is something that is “related to factors such as age and gender. Confidence in one’s own authority is assumed to increase generally with age, but gender may also influence this development” (Penrose and Geisler 506-507). But in situations where a group has been systematically oppressed for their identity, it becomes harder to gain authority. This is, in part, due to systematic oppression which continues to tell the group that their lack of authority is their own fault.

We can see a clear difference between how a lack of authority due to inexperience and a lack of authority due to oppression present themselves. Sexism can also affect how women express their thoughts and their confidence in their ideas and interpretations. For example, in “Reading and Writing Without Authority” Ann M. Penrose and Cheryl Geisler explore the differences in authority between a man with a Ph.D. named Roger and an undergraduate woman named Janet. Their findings showed that Janet’s “process differences could not be explained simply by pointing to differences in topic knowledge” but were, in part, attributed to her gender (Penrose and Geisler 507). But a lack of authority caused by oppression is not just present in the case of sexism; it is a universal experience among other minorities.

If the oppression has ties to the way the minority speaks or writes, we can also see that group’s authority, in an educational setting, is increasingly shunned. For example, Black Language is deeply tied to African Americans due to the history of the African diaspora in the United States. Despite deserving the respect that is afforded to many other languages, it is often discriminated against. In the academic setting, this is extremely detrimental to authority.

When Black students’ language practices are suppressed in classrooms or they begin to absorb messages that imply that BL [Black Language] is deficient, wrong, and unintelligent, this could cause them to internalize anti-blackness and develop negative attitudes about their linguistic, racial, cultural, and intellectual identities and about themselves. (qtd. in Baker-Bell 10)

Students who speak a second language experience a similar type of discrimination often in the form of the ESL classroom. If a student is an immigrant or comes from a household where more than one language is spoken, they will most likely be evaluated or automatically placed in an ESL classroom where they are expected to improve their English. This label often sticks with them for their entire school career, impacting the classes they take and the connections they make with non-ESL students.

Despite sounding like a good opportunity for those who aren’t native in English, “Chiang and Schmida found that the label ‘linguistic minority’ often hindered these students because they ‘are expected to stumble over the English language for it is not their native tongue’ and that students then internalized these expectations and were led by them to ‘see themselves as incapable of owning the language’” (qtd. in Ortmeier-Hooper 393). In both cases, we see clear academic discrimination based on language in which “students who absorb negative ideologies about their native language… develop a sense of linguistic inferiority and ‘lose confidence in the learning process, their own abilities, their educators, and school in general’ (Charity Hudley & Mallinson, 2014, p. 33)” (Baker-Bell 10). Knowing that authority is deeply tied to language discrimination allows us to look further into the authority of neurodivergent students, whose disabilities often directly affect their ability to speak and write in an “appropriate” way.

Neurodivergence (ND) refers to a group of disorders that affects neurological development, most existing on a spectrum of severity. The most common diagnostic categories of neurodivergence include:

(a) intellectual disabilities; (b) communication disorders; (c) autism spectrum disorders; (d) attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder; (e) specific learning disorders (e.g., dyslexia and dyscalculia); and (f) motor disorders (including developmental coordination and movements disorders, Tourette’s, and tic disorders). (Filipe 160)

Despite the label including a large array of unique disorders, most have overlapping symptoms that make an academic setting difficult. Symptoms that affect executive function, social interactions, and reading make writing specifically one of the most challenging subjects for these students. One of the most well-studied ND disorders in the realm of academics is ADHD. In these students, we are able to see a clear linguistic difference from their neurotypical (NT) peers. Students with ADHD tend to use less “complex sentences, clause per sentence, morpheme per sentence, and numeral pronouns, whereas they showed a higher frequency of using sentences and adjectives in their writing” (Kim et al. 691). This pattern of speech is not specific to ADHD and is often seen in certain other ND disorders such as Asperger’s Syndrome (Jackson et al.). It should be noted that these linguistic differences are not due to a lack of understanding of writing conventions, but rather a stylistic trend due to a difference in processing.

These differences don’t just affect word use and sentence structure, but they also affect the process of writing itself. The very nature of neurodivergence creates a thought process different from the majority; these differences are rarely accepted despite often being surface level. ND students may struggle with planning, understanding directions, and choosing an assignment topic. Walters states that “it is possible that [ND] students…may not experience the same stages of writing that structure neurotypical process approaches to writing (Walters 349). Walters shares that ND and NT students experience a number of the same difficulties with the writing process. All students can struggle with “time management, starting an essay, choosing a topic, understanding directions, and completing revisions” but the ND student faces challenges that are different “not in kind, but in degree” from NT students (Walters 349). Students do not necessarily struggle because they are ND but because of the ways they are supported, or not, in their writing approaches.

In an unstructured learning environment, these problems become exacerbated, making what could have been an easy assignment very difficult. While Walters never says that the struggles that students with neurodivergence face are not related to the symptomatology, I believe she underplays the fact that the students’ struggles can be direct symptoms of neurodivergence, which are worsened by unsupportive classroom environments. To add to this, ND students often have significant syntactic differences which, while grammatically correct, are considered lower quality writing (Kim et al.691). Some of these significant differences in ND’s language style may be a potential cause for lower grades on writing and writing assignments. The expectation for classrooms and writing conventions are built around NT people. ND people naturally do not fit these conventions, putting them at a disadvantage in the classroom.

The combination of being in an unsupportive learning environment and having their language overly critiqued is exactly the same situation that other minority students face. As previously mentioned, this combination of factors leads to a lack of authority. Neurodivergent students overwhelmingly feel a lack of support which leads them to dismiss their ideas. Co-existing disorders are extremely common in the ND population, specifically depression and anxiety, but “above all, people with ADHD conditions have very poor self-esteem” (Kim et al. 687). These are trends seen in all ND conditions. Having poor self-esteem is undoubtedly tied to poor authority. It is therefore no surprise that ND students have lower GPAs and are often in worse academic standing than their NT peers (Kim et al. 691). If classrooms were better equipped to handle “neurodiverse approaches to writing” and schools more effective at providing support, an improvement in the performance, authority, and mental health of ND students would be expected (Walters 349).

As social awareness increases and stigma decreases, we are beginning to see a rise in the number of children and adults diagnosed with neurodivergent disorders (Zablotsky et al.). The current education system has already been failing the previous number of ND students it had. A change has to happen in order to properly support the growth and education of neurodiverse students. Authority is so fundamental to life outside of school; it allows for self-advocacy, job opportunities, and continued education. These skills are especially important for students with disabilities who will no doubt face discrimination in other aspects of their lives. Creating an environment that actively dismisses the authority of these students is a perpetuation of ableism. In almost all cases, it is not the neurodivergence of the student that contributes to their academic failure, but rather the academy itself.

Creating a classroom that is accommodating to neurodivergence won’t just help ND students. NT students often face similar challenges in classrooms, and allowing differences in writing helps everyone because no human is the same. Writing classrooms should focus less on word choice and sentence structure and more on effective communication. The complexity of sentences has no impact on the ability to get a point across. This change would also accommodate those who speak Black Language or those who aren’t native in English. Idiolectic diversity should be cultivated instead of being seen as “unacademic”.

Courses should also be designed for flexibility in assignments, with opportunities for different genres, topics, and project lengths (Tomlinson and Newman 106). Current schooling and grading revolve around satisfying the teacher’s expectations; this can be socially complicated and difficult for ND students to navigate. Teacher-focused assignments don’t promote authority or growth and are often boring for all students. Giving students freedom over their assignments allows them to get excited and invested in their work. Rules and expectations are still important but should be applied in other areas.

Communication about grading criteria and assignment expectations should be specific and clear to allow students to understand what a teacher actually wants to see. There should be little room for interpretation so that students don’t get confused but should still allow for assignment freedom. Instructors can break down long assignments into smaller steps to keep students on track, and mandatory check-ins can be a useful tool in this process. ND students may feel uncomfortable coming to office hours or seeking help; building these check-ins into the course sets clear social expectations that help the student. Alternatives to assignments and expectations should always be welcome as they often mean the student is able to learn better. For example, instead of writing an outline for an essay, allowing for a graphic organizer fulfills the same role and may work better for the student. The goal in education should always be to do what is best for the student.

The current state of education is one where flexibility isn’t given, and accommodations are often fought against. Unfortunately, this means that ND students are left behind and consequently made to feel like their opinions are worthless. Allowing ND students to express their divergence through their writing fosters authority by giving them confidence in their intellect. The classroom should be a space to flex authoritative muscles, giving students the skills they’ll need later in life. In order to allow ND students to thrive we must dismantle the view that accommodations are only for the disabled. Widespread flexibility in writing promotes the authority of all students, regardless of their neurological status.

Works Cited
Baker-Bell, April. “Dismantling Anti-Black Linguistic Racism in English Language Arts Classrooms: Toward an Anti-Racist Black Language Pedagogy.” Theory Into Practice, vol. 59, no. 1, 14 Nov. 2019, pp. 8–21.

Filipe, Marisa. “How Do Executive Functions Issues Affect Writing in Students with Neurodevelopmental Disorders?” Executive Functions and Writing, Oxford University Press, 2021, pp. 160–180.

Jackson, Lynn G., et al. “Effects of Learning Strategy Training on the Writing Performance of College Students with Asperger’s Syndrome.” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, vol. 48, no. 3, 30 Mar. 2017, pp. 708–721.

Kim, Kyungil, et al. “College Students with ADHD Traits and Their Language Styles.” Journal of Attention Disorders, vol. 19, no. 8, 2015, pp. 687–693.

Ortmeier-Hooper, Christina. ““English May Be My Second Language, but I’m Not ‘ESL.’”.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 59, no. 3, 2008, pp. 389–419. JSTOR.

Penrose, Ann M., and Cheryl Geisler. “Reading and Writing without Authority.” College Composition and Communication, vol. 45, no. 4, 1994, pp. 505-20.

Tomlinson, Elizabeth, and Sara Newman. “Valuing Writers from a Neurodiversity Perspective: Integrating New Research on Autism Spectrum Disorder into Composition Pedagogy.” Composition Studies, vol. 45, no. 2,2017, pp. 91-112.

Walters, Shannon. “Toward a Critical ASD Pedagogy of Insight: Teaching, Researching, and Valuing the Social Literacies of Neurodiverse Students.” Research in the Teaching of English, vol. 49, no. 4, 2015, pp. 340–60.

Zablotsky, Benjamin, et al. “Prevalence and Trends of Developmental Disabilities among Children in the United States: 2009–2017.” Pediatrics (Evanston), vol. 144, no. 4, 2019.

by Madeline Murphy

Madeline Murphy is a double major in physics and art from Dorchester, MA. Fashion is a hobby of Madeline’s, she felt it was important to look back and “explore the role of fashion in the world of middle and high school, to help myself and others better understand our outfit choices: a task we complete every day, yet maybe don’t analyze enough.” Madeline considers fashion to be an art form and often compares fashion trends to art movements. She enjoys sewing and has been working on enhancing her garment-making skills. Madeline enjoys painting portraits and reading books, particularly those related to physics theories. Despite the apparent differences between art and science, to Madeline, they “both operate as explanations of the world, and they make a lot of sense as a pair to me.”

---

Everything began at the mall. In the universe of adolescent female friendship, the mall is the Big Bang. It’s the beginning of everything for us. It’s at the mall where our first friendships are born, it’s at the mall where our consumerist habits are nurtured, it’s at the mall where we begin to understand ourselves.

I’ve loved clothes ever since I was little. I love concocting new pairings of pants and shirts. I love layering my necklaces and having a ring on each finger. I love seeing where the clothes take me, I love treating my outfits as an art form. I’ve lived most of my autonomous life as a teenage girl: an identity that has no doubt shaped the way I dress. From dress codes to fashion blogs, the way teenage girls dress has always been under a cultural microscope. We’re scrutinized and judged and condemned for the clothes we wear; therefore, our wardrobe choices often mean more than a simple “I like the color of this top.” We use fashion to talk to each other and to speak to the world around us, but how? How does fashion function as a form of communication for teenage girls?

The mall is not a respected place. Shopping is not a respected hobby. Treating life like a fashion show is a frivolous phase, a trivial usage of time. These cultural conceptions about the mall always ignore the crucial role that these massive shopping centers play in the development of teenage girls. In the article “Talking Fashion in Female Friendship Groups: Negotiating the Necessary Marketplace Skills and Knowledge,” Sheehy notes that often young girls “engage in long, intense talks” to build and sustain friendships but “girls often need the pretext of an activity” in order for these talks to occur (qtd. in Yalkin and Rosenbaum-Elliott 304). According to Haytoko and Baker, shopping therefore becomes the origin story of female friendship, “as demonstrated by the importance of the mall for female adolescents’ friendship groups” (qtd. in Yalkin and Rosenbaum-Elliott 304 ). As a young girl, the mall was the most magical place I could imagine. It represented infinite possibilities: every teenage girl in every PG-13 movie practically lived at the mall; shopping bags always dangled from their arms and their credit cards (mysteriously) never maxed out. To my understanding, the mall embodied the essence of teenage girlhood: a fact that has not changed since my middle school days. The mall is the creation story of adolescent female friendship, it is our collective Garden of Eden. Fashion is in our bones. Because the patriarchy demands that our bodies be left on eternal display (for a never-blinking, never-ending audience of men), our clothes take center stage in the performance of teenage girlhood.

The way teenage girls dress is under such a bright societal spotlight that deviating from the de facto dress code is an act of rebellion, therefore positing conformity as the most natural state to exist in. Teenage girls are an eclectic, kaleidoscopic group. There seems to be an endless gamut of “teenage girl”: cool girl, clean girl, it girl, fashion girl, artsy girl, sporty girl, smart girl, musical girl, and so on. In this way, girls are separated and defined by their hobbies. We cannot exist without the hard edges of our interests to give us form and space and weight – without these defining hobbies, we are lost in a sea of flickering, ill-defined girls, blinking in and out of existence. We blur into the monolith. Ultimately, it is our choice whether we want to blend into this collective or differentiate ourselves. Through clothes, teenage girls decide where they want to fall on the spectrum of visibility. In order to better understand the teenage girls that I’m writing about, I conducted a survey for anyone between 13 to 19 years old who identifies as a female, and I distributed it to both high school and college students. In my survey, 76.2% of my 42 participants described their style as “basic.” This is a style that’s characterized by leggings and jeans, Brandy Melville tops, simple jewelry, and casual shoes. “Basic” is the status quo and conforming to the status quo is a tool of survival. Teenage girls who dress “basic” are choosing to remain stylistically indistinguishable from their peers, because their hobbies and interests are not immediately evident from their fashion. By forfeiting their individuality, they are gaining a protective veil of anonymity. Furthermore, 34 participants (or 81%) agreed with the statement “I care about the way my outfits look,” revealing that most teenage girls are not only aware of the special attention placed on them, but aim to appease these powers that govern them. Whether for concern about male validation or female acceptance, on the whole, teenage girls aim to fit in. This desire to conform translates to a total absence of risk when it comes to presenting themselves. Beyond an instinctually human anxiety concerning other people’s perceptions of you, teenage girls deal with heightened stakes regarding their wardrobe.

Moving through the world as a teenage girl means being judged for any and all decisions you make. The list of possible judges is endless; however, most often, judgements are handed down by our own. Teenage girls judge other teenage girls. In their paper, “Reading Fashion as Age: Teenage Girls’ and Grown Women’s Accounts of Clothing as Body and Social Status,” Ingun Grimstad Klepp and Ardis Storm-Mathisen, researchers of consumerism at Oslo Metropolitan University, conducted interviews to study the social politics of teen girl fashion. Since the bodies of teenage girls are imprisoned under a societal spotlight – they are analyzed, sexualized, and ostracized without abandon nor care for the hearts and minds encased inside – a surplus of opinions exists surrounding a girl’s decision to either reveal or cover her body. Klepp and Storm-Mathisen explain that: “Baggy clothes have little value for teenage girls precisely because such clothes hide the body’s feminine shapes. Girls who opt to wear baggier pants, such as sweatpants, are described as unpopular by other teenage girls” (Klepp 328). Thus, the bodies of teenage girls are deemed to be the most essential part of them, so popularity is preserved by wearing tight clothes. As a teenage girl, you are condemned to exist on a spectrum ranging from slut to prude. There is no escape from this fate. Therefore, the way you dress – and the degree to which your body is revealed – communicates where you fall on this spectrum. Tight clothes make you a slut, and baggy clothes make you a prude. In my survey, 81% of the participants revealed that they shop where they do because the clothes fit their personal style, while 76.2% of the participants answered that they shop where they do because the clothes are comfortable. These percentages suggest a correlation between personal style and comfortability for teenage girls. “Comfortable clothes” is a genre of fashion that centers the experience of wearing clothes, rather than aesthetics: it includes anything from leggings to sweatpants, and form-fitting Lululemon zip-ups to baggy sweatshirts. However, is comfortability an elusive desire for teenage girls, since our every wardrobe decision is judged so brutally? Is it not impossible to be comfortable with the eyes of our peers studying our every outfit, understanding that our popularity is at risk with our every choice? Sexuality shouldn’t be something that is irreversibly tethered to your fashion choices; however, knowing that the world perceives your outfit in black and white – as either a solicitation or a refusal – means that your clothing choices escalate into an unspoken communication with the world.

This silent communication reinforces the social hierarchy of teenage girls, which is built upon the divisions between them. Acquiescing to the status quo or resisting the predetermined mold either lifts you up or drags you down on the pyramid of teenage girl popularity. This hierarchy is often explored in popular media. For instance, Euphoria is an Emmy award-winning HBO show that attracts a substantial audience of American teenage girls. During a therapy session, Jules Vaungh, a main character on the show, explains the social hierarchies she observes other girls participating in:

“JULES: Well…Like… Most girls, when you first talk to them, they, like, automatically analyze and compare themselves to you. And then, you know, they, they, search for where you fit in their hierarchy, and then they treat you accordingly.

THERAPIST: What hierarchy?

JULES: Like, how close you are to what they all collectively want to be. Like, in their heads.

THERAPIST: Right.

JULES: And, you know , even if they’ve, like, mastered the art of hiding it with, like, smiles and nods, and small talk, it’s, like, you’d still catch them doing it. Like, like their eyes wandering over your face, or… or, you know, the quick takes up and down your body. Or like, they watch how your clothes hang off your torso, or, like, they look for what tags are on your clothes to see where you shop, or they’ll watch your hands to find, like, fucked up cuticles or chipped nail polish. Honestly, it would, it would be a kind of sensual experience if it wasn’t so fucking terrifying” (Euphoria).

We can’t take Jules’s monologue as fact – since it’s from a fictional TV show. However, we can analyze it as a piece of media that’s popular with teenage girls for a reason. Her words can serve as a magnification of the feelings shared by all teenage girls, whether they participate in the organization of their peers on an invisible pyramid or not. This same hierarchy is examined by Klepp and Storm-Mathisen in their study, from which a participant reveals her opinions about a classmate who fails to conform. In one girl’s account she shares: “We had a girl in our class who was very boyish. And sometimes we wondered why she never wears fashion clothes. If you really think about it, they wouldn’t have suited her much better. She doesn’t have the right shape for them. So it doesn’t matter for her” (Klepp 328). This 13-year-old girl’s testimonial and Jules’s monologue reveal how the body and clothes of a teenage girl fuse together to create the power which she wields over her peers. Popularity is achieved by harvesting that power. Shirts and pants and shoes make the unspoken, unseen world of teen girl pecking orders observable to all. Adapting to the desired mold – wearing tight, basic clothes – increases your value to the system, because you’re harmonizing your identity to the collective’s idea of what a teenage girl should be. Considering that, dressing alternatively either demotes (if you’re unsuccessful in your attempt to diverge) or upgrades (if you’re successful in your attempt to diverge) your spot on the pyramid. However, the quantity of alternative teenage girls differs vastly between online and reality.

Social media causes people to adapt themselves to whatever app they tap open. If we conceptualize social media apps as different rooms in a house, then we’re modifying our personas to match whatever digital room we walk into. This transformation is something we instinctively know to do. Michelle Ruiz, a contributing editor for Vogue and a freelance journalist who specializes in writing about social trends, writes that we all want to look “professional on work Zooms, polished on Instagram, flirty on dating profiles and fuzzily relatable on TikTok, while occasionally appeasing your mom on Facebook” (Ruiz). This shapeshifting is most extreme on TikTok, which 43.9% of my survey participants reported as the social media app that provides them with the most inspiration for outfits. The digital landscape is a flat expanse, and the only way to separate ourselves from our cyber contemporaries is to build ourselves up. Using our identity as the bricks and mortar, we construct our digital presence. Niche and more niche interests are piled on top of each other until our online persona – a mountain of arcane hobbies and obscure books and underground movies – reaches towards the infinite cosmos of originality. This is an endeavor that proves particularly challenging for teenage girls. Abiding by the simple laws of the patriarchy, our identities are devalued from the get-go. So, in order to prove to the world that we are interesting and deep and worth listening to, we have to struggle to erect an online persona that is distinctly different from all other teenage girls. Hence, “not like other girls” syndrome.

“Not like other girls”-syndrome (an informal name) is a social phenomenon: in an attempt to avoid the suffocation of the patriarchy, teenage girls separate themselves from the “other girls” (the monolith: the girls who dress basically). Girls who believe that they’re “not like other girls” are reacting to misogyny by distancing themselves from anything traditionally feminine. In its most simplistic form, this syndrome manifests itself as hatred for the color pink, contempt for skirts, and hostility towards feminine girls. On TikTok, “not like other girls”-syndrome is pushed to its extreme, mutating into something new: “not like anyone who has ever lived before because I am completely original”-syndrome, a name I’ve given to this advanced form of “not like other girls”-syndrome. The excessively fast-paced trend cycle of TikTok means that teenage girls are snatching at anything that’ll give them the upper hand in the battle for originality. The rarer your clothes, the cooler you are. And coolness is everything. When it comes to fashion, TikTok is a breeding ground for competition. Likes, comments, and followers are overt proof that your digital persona is a success – you’ve attained power within the digital hierarchy of teenage girls.

Beyond external hierarchies, we can examine internal hierarchies that impact the way teenage girls use clothes to communicate. In the field of psychology, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is a theory that is often illustrated as a pyramid with 5 levels (listed from bottom to top): physiological, safety, love and belonging, esteem, and self-actualization. Needs that are low on the hierarchy must be met before one can advance to the higher levels (Mcleod). Therefore, teenage girls who cannot afford to participate in mall culture are abandoned at the bottom of this psychological pyramid, fighting to attain the bare minimum to survive. For girls living in poverty, there’s an overt absence of literature that explains how their socioeconomic standing impacts their relationship to fashion. Their experience of girlhood is wholly unrepresented in both the spaces that teenage girls occupy, and in the academic publications that analyze these spaces. These girls are rendered invisible because they don’t even have the opportunity to conform, much less to reject the status quo. Furthermore, the highest level of Maslow’s pyramid – self-actualization – is one that most people never reach, regardless of wealth. Joe Yaeger, a marketing professional who teaches at Thomas Jefferson University, writes on his blog that “[self-actualization] comes only when a person realizes their own personal abilities and traits, both good and bad […] They no longer need a high number of friends and followers to feel satisfied with themselves” (Yaeger). For teenage girls, attaining self-actualization can feel the same as shirking self-actualization. Teenage girls are defined wholly by their outfits and hobbies – an unstable foundation for any identity – and they conceptualize themselves in terms of these two elements. Therefore, it’s easy to conflate validation from their peers with genuine self-security: both are products of teenage girls’ attempt to outline their own existence. Dressing to be as unique as possible is therefore either the ultimate form of rebellion against the patriarchy, or the absolute abandonment of power.

From the very beginning, fashion has been an essential tool of communication for teenage girls. The mall is our collective Big Bang; it’s where we first began to understand our girlhood and curate our identities. From the mall, we’ve spread out to the far-reaching corners of the teenage girl universe. The hierarchies we build determine the laws of this universe, and clothes function as the superluminal signals communicating our home amongst the stars. So, the next time you’re getting dressed, think about why you’re dressed the way you are. What is your outfit communicating to the world?

Works Cited
Euphoria. Created by Sam Levinson, HBO Entertainment, 2021.

Klepp, Ingun Grimstad, and Ardis Storm-Mathisen. “Reading Fashion as Age: Teenage Girls’ and Grown Women’s Accounts of Clothing as Body and Social Status.” Fashion Theory, vol. 9, no. 3, 2005, pp. 323–42.

Kim, Eun Young, and Youn-Kyung Kim. “The Effects of Ethnicity and Gender on Teens’ Mall Shopping Motivations.” Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, vol. 23, no.2, pp. 65–77.

Mcleod, Sean. “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.” Simply Psychology, 2007.McLeod, S. A. (2007). 

Murphy, Madeline. “Research Project.” Survey, 2022.

Ruiz, Michelle. “Style & Fashion: The Digital Dress Code.” The Wall Street Journal Eastern Edition, 2022.

Yalkin, Cagri, and Richard Rosenbaum-Elliott. “Talking Fashion in Female Friendship Groups: Negotiating the Necessary Marketplace Skills and Knowledge.” Journal of Consumer Policy, vol. 37, no. 2, 2014, pp. 301–31. 

Yeager, Joe. “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Explains Teens’ Obsession with Social Media.” Josephmyeager, 2016.