Quickwriting: a technique for

invention in writing
George Jacobs
282
This article recommends the introduction of quickwriting: an invention
technique, to second-language learners. Quickwriting has three features:
concentrating on content, not worrying about form, and writing without
stopping. It is a good way to help students develop ideas, and words to
express ideas, by separating the creating stage of writing from the editing
stage. Otherpossible advantages of quickwriting are in generating writing
quantity, thinking in the target language, developing the ability to write
under pressure of time, warming up for other writing, and understanding
the need to edit. The article describes how quickwriting can be demon-
strated to students, suggests ground rules for the technique, and mentions
ways in which it can be integrated into writing classes. Although quickwrit-
ing has limitations, it can help students with their writing and may even aid
teachers with theirs. 1
In the teaching of second-language writing, there is an emerging emphasis
on the notion that ideas develop as part of the writing process (Spack 1984).
According to this notion, writing lessons should not be confined to studying
how to transfer already existing ideas from the head to the page; but, also,
students should become aware that while they are writing, new ideas can
emerge, and old ones can grow, change, and sometimes be discarded.
Invention is one term for this conception and development of ideas.
One invention technique is quickwriting, also known as freewriting,
loopwriting, speedwriting, and flashwriting (Macrorie 1976, Elbow
1973 and 1981, Cowan 1983, Lane and Perrin 1984). There are differences
in the ways some people use these five terms, but for the purposes of this
article they are treated as equivalent. Quickwriting has three main fea-
tures: concentrating on content, not worrying about form, and writing
without stopping. While quickwriting can be used for a number of pur-
poses, its primary purpose is to generate ideas.
Advantages of The key advantage of quickwriting is that it aids invention by separating
quickwriting the process of creating from the process of editing. By encouraging students
temporarily to put aside concern about form, it also allows them to concen-
trate on content. When writers try to consider content and form simul-
taneously, the result is often slow, painful, uninspired writing; or worse,
writers block sets in and nothing comes out (Bruce et al. 1982:135).
Two types of invention are going on in quickwriting. First, and primarily,
ideas are emerging. Second, quickwriting puts ways of expressing these
new ideas there on the paper. These ideas are not always good ones, and the
words used to express them often need revising, polishing, or throwing
ELT Journal Volume 40/4 October 1986 Oxford University Press 1986
articles welcome
away, but now students have something to work with besides a blank sheet
of paper.
Quickwriting helps students invent, because it turns off the voice inside
their heads telling them that their writing is not good enough, that voice
nagging them to pause over full stops, prepositions, and paragraphs.
Quickwriting allows students to tell that doubting, criticizing voice, Please
wait outside while Im creating. Ill be happy to see you and listen to your
important comments later. The respite gained by showing their editors to
the waiting room gives students a chance to form and express their ideas
without interruption.
The way in which quickwriting enables writers to use the unconscious
part of the mind to invent is highlighted by Macrorie (1976). In a passage
that reminds one of Krashens ideas on acquisition (1984 and elsewhere),
he says:
The most remarkable discovery of this approach has been that in free
writing persons who think they have no skills frequently find themselves
exploiting major strategies of writing: alliteration, metaphor, rhythm,
parallel structure, telling details, a building of suspense, words speaking
to words within the writing, dialogue, powerful endings. And before they
have been instructed in them.
There are probably two reasons for this emergence of language
powers: the first is that free writing liberates students to use their speech
competencies without fear of being nailed for faulty form. The second is
that the act of writing so fast often moves them into a kind of trance in
which nearby distractions fade and they focus on the act, so that their
words seem to be writing themselves. In that condition (which scientists
have isolated by study of brain waves as most often occurring when a
person is drifting into or out of a deep sleep) writers can remember their
past experiences more fully and vividly. Part of that experience has been
reading and listening to the cadences of the words of skilful writers and
speakers. Much of what people have heard and read has been printed on
their brains - and at a propitious time they can pull up from the reservoir
patterns of language and form useful to their purposes.
Scardamalia ( 1981) makes a suggestion which could be related to quick-
writing and inventing. Referring to novice writers in a first language, she
suggests that breaking the writing process down into stages reduces the
cognitive load. Put simply, this means that a project can be undertaken
more easily and successfully if things are done one at a time. Skilled writers
may be able to handle many tasks at the same time, but those who are less
skilled find trying to carry out several tasks at once very difficult. Most
second-language students would seem to fit into the less-skilled category
and would benefit from a technique like quickwriting which eases the
cognitive load by separating the writing process into recursive steps.
Hilgers (1980) did research on quickwriting as an invention strategy. He
compared the writing of two groups of first-language students. One group
was trained in quickwriting techniques, the other in a communications
awareness/problem-solving approach. Those trained in quickwriting were
found to produce finished pieces of writing which were richer in ideas and
better as a whole.
Quickwriting: a technique for invention 283
articles welcome
Other advantages While this article focuses on quickwriting as an invention strategy, there are
other possible advantages. Brire (1966) suggests that increasing the quan-
tity of student writing leads to improvement in quality. Quickwriting is
certainly one way of getting learners to write more. However, the results of
studies on whether quantity begets quality are mixed. McQueen et al.
(1963), Brire (1966)) Donaldson (1967), and Bamberg (1978) found that
increased amounts of writing did improve quality; but Dressel et al. (1952),
Heys (1963), Arnold (1964), and Jacobs (1985) found no improvement.
Also, Krashen (1984:20) argues that what most helps writing is input from
reading, not practice in writing.
Lane and Perrin (1984) mention other possible benefits of quickwriting.
They state that writing quickly encourages second-language learners to
think in the target language, because there is not enough time to think in the
native language and then translate. Like Clarke and Walker (1980), they
also suggest that students ability to perform well in situations where time is
limited, such as essay-type exams, benefits from quickwriting practice.
Another way that quickwriting might be helpful is as a warm-up exer-
cise. At the beginning of a lesson, doing a quickwrite can get students in the
groove for writing. Quickwriting as a warm-up can also be used as a way of
clearing the head of extraneous thoughts and feelings, so that students can
focus on the topic of their writing (Elbow 1981: 15). Perhaps doing a
quickwrite about the trip they will take on Saturday will allow students to
then forget about the trip for a while and concentrate on the writing.
A very important possible benefit of quickwriting is that it shows learners
the need to revise. Too many students just copy their first draft, changing a
few minor points, and hand the result in as their final effort. The obviously
unfinished nature of quickwriting encourages students to get into the habit
of revising. This is important, because studies (for example, Per1 1979)
have shown that unskilled writers do little revising and revise just for
mechanics, not for ideas. Quickwriting may seem inefficient to writers who
try to get everything right first time. Quickwriting generates a lot of ideas,
many of which may later be discarded; but an advantage is that, if they get
many ideas down on paper, writers can then choose the ones best suited to
their purpose (Hartfiel et al. 1985:7), Q uic
k writes can be writer-based, but
then a reader-based draft can be constructed, starting from those parts of
the quickwrite that best match the readers particular needs.
Procedure Students will need to know the basic procedure for quickwriting. Here is a
list of possible ground rules.
1 Concentrate on ideas. Forget about mechanics, grammar, and organiza-
tion. Take care of those at another stage in the writing process. (Depend-
ing on the situation, students may be asked to stay on one topic or to let
their minds go where they will.)
2 Do not stop writing. The pen should be moving at all times. (The
emphasis put on speed and writing a lot of words will differ from teacher
to teacher.)
3 Do not stop to cross out or correct mistakes.
4 If you cannot think of anything to write, repeat the last word or phrase
you wrote, or just write I cant think of anything to write again and
again until you think of something.
284 George Jacobs
articles welcome
5 If you do not know a word in the target language, leave a space or write
the word in your native language, and then go back to writing in the
target language.
6 The amount of time for each quickwrite can be fixed according to how
long the teacher and students feel is productive; or quickwriting can
continue as long as each student feels that good ideas are developing.
Also, students may want to pause to think for a minute or to read over
what they have written - for ideas only - before starting another burst of
quickwriting.
7 One possible preliminary activity is to have learners think about a topic
silently before writing (Kupper-Herr 1983). Alternatively, the class can
discuss a topic as a whole or in groups to help to start thoughts flowing.
8 Quickwrites should not be graded or marked. Grading would defeat the
purpose of encouraging students not to worry about form.
9 The teacher may want to quickwrite along with the students, to set an
example. By taking a single piece of paper and putting it directly on your
desk, you can write noisily, thereby providing sound as well as visual
modelling.
An example of quickwriting and the resulting final version is offered in the
Appendix.
Modelling Before students do quickwrites, preparation is needed. Lane and Perrin
(1984) advise that learners should see quickwriting modelled first. The
initial step in modelling is for the purpose and the rules to be explained. The
teacher can serve as a demonstrator, but Lane and Perrin advise having an
outside person, or ideally two people, to act as models. If possible, a
demonstration should be video-taped, thus eliminating the need to find
demonstrators for subsequent classes. The topic is given, and the demon-
strators begin to write so that the students can see what they are writ-
ing - on a board, for example, or an overhead projector, or on paper taped
to the walls. When the allotted time is up, the demonstrators count the
number of words written.
Then the teacher draws students attention to the fact that there are
mistakes in the writing, and that nothing is crossed out or erased. The use of
I dont know what to write or similar phrases is also noted. Also, the
different ideas on the topic that each demonstrator had and the variations
in the way they expressed their ideas can show students that there is a lot of
room for variety in writing.
The next step in demonstrating quickwriting is bracketing. Here, the
demonstrators, teacher, and learners look over the quickwrites and discuss
which are the good parts that could be used in a first draft, and put brackets
round them. The demonstrators then choose one of the bracketed sections
as the basis for their next quickwrite. (The basic method of first quickwrit-
ing, then selecting one part of the quickwrite as the starting point of another
is called loop writing (Elbow 1973)). In addition to seeing a demonstra-
tion, students can be shown the quickwrites and the final compositions that
were eventually produced from them.
Quickwriting: a technique for invention 285
articles welcome
Loop writing Elbow (1981:59-77) introduced a somewhat different approach to loop
writing. He compared it to a voyage into space and then back home again.
For the first half of the voyage, writers use several of thirteen proposed
devices (or any of their own) to do quickwrites on the topic. Some of the
devices proposed by Elbow are writing in dialogue form, pretending to be
writing to a different audience, and putting down first thoughts. The
voyage out is a journey of discovery; during the second half (the voyage
back) writers carefully consider their aims in writing the piece, and con-
struct a first draft by putting together the parts of the quickwrites that fit
those aims.
Practising After students have seen quickwriting demonstrated, it is their turn to try it.
Spack (1984) notes that students did not use invention techniques which
they had only read about, but not acutally practised. The benefits and
procedure should be repeated and discussed before students do their first
quickwrite. One possibility is for students to do that initial quickwrite in
their native language. Later, if the teacher wants learners to pay attention
to the number of words written per quickwrite, quickwrites done in the
second language can be compared to the one done in the first language,
which serves as a goal. The reason for having students count words is not, of
course, to encourage the belief that quantity equals quality. The sole
purpose of the exercise is to achieve a situation where the writer is deeply
and exclusively focusing on ideas.
Using quickwrites in Once students have had a chance to observe and practise quickwriting, it
writing class can be used in many ways in the lesson. Quickwriting can be just an
exercise in itself, or it can be used to help in other writing projects. The
obvious place for quickwriting, when used to facilitate other writing, is as a
first step to generate ideas. However, learners need to realize that new ideas
can be helpful later in the writing process also. The composing process is
not a linear one, going from invention to editing to final product. Rather,
writing is often recursive, going back and forth between inventing and
editing. Lane and Perrin (1984) advise that quickwriting be used for
writing drafts, revising, and giving peer feedback.
Although the let-it-flow, unrestrained looseness of quickwrites may
seem in great contrast to the controlled, patterned nature of outlining, the
two techniques can be harmoniously combined. An outline can be written
first and then quickwriting used to fill it out. Here, quickwritings power as
a cure for writers block will be useful. Alternatively, quickwriting can be
done first and an outline used to organize the parts of the creation worth
saving.
Knepler (1984), calling it impromptu writing, suggests that quickwrit-
ing be used in a game-like manner. In one activity she recommends that
students each write a list of nouns. Then they create a story using as many
of the nouns as possible.
Students reactions Students seem to like quickwriting. Hilgers (1980) reported a favourable
response, with students feeling that quickwriting was freeing, with
worries about choices and editing put off till later stages of the writing
process. Lane and Perrin (1984) state that, in a survey of an ESL class
which used quickwriting, seventy-five per cent said they liked it, and eighty-
eight per cent that it helped them with ideas for papers. I have also found,
informally, by asking students to write unsigned reactions at the end of a
286 George Jacobs
articles welcome
course, that, while there was initial scepticism, by the end of the term a
fairly large majority thought quickwriting was a good idea.
Some teachers worry that asking students to write quickly will provoke
stress. One way to overcome this potential problem is to assure students
that quickwrites will not be graded. However, perhaps the main reason why
some learners resist quickwriting is that they, and some of their teachers,
are not aware or do not agree that a process approach to writing is superior
to a write-it-right-the-first-time method. This latter method leads stu-
dents to follow the procedure described by Raimes (1983:260): They worry
about accuracy; they stop after each sentence and go back and check it. . ..
Quickwriting is the exact opposite of this method; therefore, initially, at
least, quickwrites, with the sloppy handwriting, poor grammar, and irrele-
vant ideas that writing quickly often produces, seem to some students like
uglywrites, and they want nothing to do with them.
Two ways of encouraging students to give quickwriting a try are to
explain the benefits of the process approach and to teach proof-reading
techniques. To convince learners of the advantage of breaking writing down
into steps, teachers can cite research in first- and second-language writing
and in cognitive psychology. Even better, they can let students themselves
experience the benefit of writing with a process approach.
Instructing learners in effective ways of proof-reading is another means
of getting reluctant students to give quickwriting a wholehearted try. Sivell
(1980:43) states that confident self-correction is the key to happy, unin-
hibited writing, because. . . enthusiastic writers must be able to forge ahead
powerfully, in the confidence that they have the know-how to tidy up any
minor errors when they reread. Jacobs et al. (1986) provide suggestions for
motivating students to proof-read and for showing them how.
One possible reason for differences of opinion on quickwriting is varia-
tions in cognitive styles. Brown (1980:93-4) talks about the distinction
between impulsive and reflective learners. Impulsive learners like to
plunge right in and try something new. They do not worry a lot about
mistakes. On the other hand, reflective learners like to consider things
carefully before acting. Reid (1984) illustrates the difference between
impulsive and reflective writers by comparing her own cautious, considered
composing style with her husbands more daring, jump-right-in method.
Perhaps quickwriting is better suited to the impulsive writer. Another,
related cause of different reactions to quickwriting may be that some
writers prefer to juggle ideas in their heads, while others find it more
efficient to put ideas down on paper and then sort them out. Quickwriting
fits most comfortably with the latter style.
Limitations Quickwriting does not serve all of students invention needs. One obvious
limitation is that you cannot write what you do not know. Elbow (1981: 16)
calls quickwriting a mysterious underground process and, comparing it to
Zen, says that it has a power to produce ideas not available to the conscious
controlling self. But if a student has to write a paper about the inter-
national rice market, a quickwrite is not going to take the place of some
reading on the subject. However, starting with a quickwrite about what you
already know on the topic and why it is of interest might help give focus to
your reading.
Another possible limitation of quickwriting concerns the question of its
appropriateness to second-language writing. Much of the investigation into
quickwriting has been done by those interested primarily in first-language
Quickwriting: a technique f or invention 287
articles welcome
writing. Unlike students working in their native language, the second-
language student faces the problem not only of coming up with ideas, but
also of coming up with them in a second language. Whether or not this
means that students, especially less advanced ones, should be encouraged
to invent in their native language (and whether they do so anyway, irre-
spective of encouragement) are questions that should be addressed by
future research.
It should also be kept in mind that quickwriting is not the only invention
technique that students should become familiar with. Often, using a
number of techniques is helpful. Kinney (1979, cited in Spack 1984)
classifies quickwriting as being in the intuitive invention mode, and says
that there are also empirical and rhetorical invention modes. A given
student in a given situation may choose one or several from among the
many possible techniques. (See Cowan 1983:7-36 for additional invention
techniques.)
Conclusion These limitations notwithstanding, quickwriting is a technique that all
second-language writers should have a chance to experience, and to make a
part of their repertoire of invention strategies. Whether quickwriting is
used regularly or only in cases of extreme writers block, it is a valuable tool
for helping learners to discover new ideas by focusing on content and
temporarily forgetting about form. Quickwriting can help students see
writing as a process which goes through stages of significant growth and
change. There are many ways in which it can be used in the classroom; this
article has discussed only some of the possibilities. Quickwriting is a
technique you may want to consider introducing to your students and even
trying yourself.
Received October 1985
Note
1 I wish to acknowledge the help I have received
in preparing this article from Pensuwan
Nakhapreecha, Wachira Moonmuang, Vannee
Deajakorn, and the staff of the Serials Department
of the Central Library at Chiang Mai University.
References
Arnold, L. 1964. Writers cramp and eyestrain - are
they paying off? English Journal 53: 10-15.
Bamberg, B. 1978. Composition instruction does
make a difference: a comparison of the high school
preparation of college freshmen in regular and
remedial English classes. Research in the Teaching of
English 12:47-59.
Brire, E. 1966. Quality versus quantity in second
language composition. Language Learning 16:141-
51.
Brown, H. D. 1980. Principles of Language Learning and
Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Bruce, B., A. Collins, A. D. Rubin, and D. Centner.
1982. Three perspectives on writing. Educational
Psychologist 17/3:131-45.
288 George Jacobs
Clarke, D. and D. Walker, 1980. Speedwriting: a
technique for improving writing fluency. English
Teaching Forum 20-21.
Cowan, E. 1983. Writing. Brief Edition. Glenview,
Illinois: Scott Foresman.
Donaldson, K. 1967. Variables distinguishing
between effective and ineffective writers in the tenth
grade. Journal of Experimental Education 4:37-41.
Dressel, P., J . Schmid, and G. Kincaid. 1952. The
effect of writing frequency upon essay-type writing
proficiency at the college level. Journal of Educational
Research 46:285-93.
Elbow, P. 1973. Writing Without Teachers. New York:
Oxford University Press
Elbow, P. 1981. Writing With Power. New York: OUP.
Hartfie1, V. F., J . B. Hughey, D. B. Wormuth, and
H. L. J acobs. 1985. Learning ESL Composition.
Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Heys, F. 1962. The theme-a-week assumption: a
report on an experiment. English Journal 51:320-2.
Hilgers, T. L. 1980. Training college composition
students in the use of freewriting and problem-solv-
ing heuristics for rhetorical invention.. Research in the
Teaching of English 14:293-307.
articles welcome
J acobs, G. 1985. An Investigation into Effects of
Quickwriting on Writing Ability. Unpublished
manuscript, Chiang Mai University.
J acobs, G., M. Gordon, and P. Boonruang. 1986.
Encouraging Effective Proofreading. Paper pre-
sented at the Thai/TESOL Convention, Bangkok,
January 1986.
Kinney, J . 1979. Classifying heuristics. College Com-
position 30/4:351-5.
Knepler, M. 1984. Impromptu writing to increase
fluency TESOL Newsletter 18: 1.
Krashen, S. 1984. Writing: Research, Theory, and Appli-
cations. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kupper-Herr, G. 1983. Prewriting Activities in an
ESL Writing Program. Unpublished MA thesis,
University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Lane J . and C. Perrin. 1984. Quickwriting: Why and
How in the Classroom. Unpublished manuscript,
University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Macrorie, K. 1976. Telling Writing. Second Edition,
Rochelle Park: Hayden.
McQueen, R., A. K. Murray, and F. Evans. 1963.
Relationships between writing required in high
school and English proficiency in college. Joumal of
Experimental Education 31:419-23.
Moskowitz, G. 1978. Caring and Sharing in the Foreign
Language Classroom. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
Perl, S. 1979. The composing processes of unskilled
college writers. Research in the Teaching of English.
13/4: 317-36.
Reid, J . 1984. The radical outliner and the radical
brainstormer: a perspective on composing pro-
cesses. TESOL Quarterly 18:3 529-34.
Scardamalia, M. 1981. How children cope with the
cognitive demands of writing in C. Fredricksen
(ed.): Writing: The Nature, Development and Teaching of
Written Communication. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Law-
rence Erlbaum.
Sivell, J . 1980. Self-correction of compositions: the
three-pencil method. English Teaching Forum
18/3:42-3.
Spack, R. 1984. Invention strategies and the ESL
composition student. TESOL Quarterly 18:649-70.
Appendix
An example of using quickwrites for invention in
essay writing.
Step I
a. The students were given a composition written by
the teacher describing someone in the teachers past
who had been a good influence on him and telling
what the influence was (Moskowitz 1978: 134).
b. Students were asked to think of a person who had a
similar good effect on their lives.
Step 2
a. Students and teacher each took a piece of paper and
wrote at the top How _____ was a good influ-
ence on me, with the name of their person in the
blank.
Students and teacher did a five-minute quickwrite
on the subject, continuing past five minutes if they
wanted to. This is what one student produced:
How Professor Shimizu was good influence on me
Last year I went to Japan I went there because I
want to increased my experience about orthoptic.
Profess Shimizu care me He is very kind person but
he look serious. He is a very tall and neat in dress-
ing. He does't talk so much. Sometime he does talk
with me but he teach me very much about orthop-
tic. I alway go with him to drink when He drink he
is very nice On his work he do it very well he has so
much experience about orthoptic and he has many
technique to do about his work. He teach me some-
thing that make me improve in orthoptic in examin-
ation children that is a problem for me because it is
difficult to take something or examination children
Most of my patient is children so it.
Step 3
a. People read over their quickwrites to see what ideas
had appeared, and they thought about other things
they might want to write about.
b. Everyone did a second quickwrite. This is how the
same student proceeded:
The charactor of professor that I impression are
that he was strong man, he was good at his work, he
has a charactor to be a good boss. He is very kind.
When he works he is serious and after that he
enjoyed with his collegue He like to drike everyday
after work because he has a problem about his
family but whe he work he forget and do any thing
with a great effort He has many experience in
Ophthomology he is a goo surgeon He works every-
thing eat. He try to do anything although he is
serious but evyone like him. He has a good way to
control his department everyone respect him.
Everyone respect him he is very old but he has
strong to do work with to do.
Step 4
a. Quickwrites were looked at by their writers and
others to identify the main ideas which had
emerged.
b. These ideas were used to form a preliminary out-
line. The student of orthoptics wrote:
i Introduction
ii Kindness
iii Knowledge
iv Hard work
v Good boss
Step 5
a. The outlines were expanded into rough drafts.
b. The drafts were examined for content by the writer
and others. Good parts, as well as bad, were noted.
Quickwriting: a technique for invention 289
articles welcome
step 6
a. A part or parts of the drafts which needed more or
new content were identified. The paragraph below
needed rewriting, because the body of the para-
graph was not closely enough related to the topic
sentence:
He was an optholmologist who had a lot of know-
ledges and experiences. I admired his efficiency. He
still studied and looked alert all the time even if he
was and old man These things pushed (stimulated)
me up when I was a lazy bones.
b. A guiding sentence was written at the top of a piece
of paper, and a further quickwrite was done:
I was impressed by Dr. Shimizus large amount
of knowledge about ophthomology.
I am sure that Prof. has a lot of knowledg and
experience I sure that because he solve many prob-
lem that happen to another such as som doctor have
a problem while has has operation the patient he
cant find what is wrong in the retina and professor
help him to do in finally he can find it by himself
after Professor guide him to do. guide him to do
guide him to do guide guide He knows how to solve
the problem after he read patients history read
patient history.
The following is the final version, after many rewrites.
(Two examples of ideas in the quickwrites that were
not selected for inclusion are the part about how the
writers patients are mostly children, and the part
about the Professors family problem.)
Someone special
In my life, many people have been a good influence on
me. One such person was Yoshinori Shimizu, a pro-
fessor of ophthalmology. I knew him when I went to
Japan last year to train in orthoptics and refraction at
Nippon Medical School in Tokyo. He was nearly fifty-
five years old with white hair, tall and rather thin. He
looked smart in suits which were often blue or gray.
He was a good influence on me in many ways. First,
I was impressed by his kindness. An example was the
warm welcome he gave me when I arrived in Japan.
This and the help he gave me during my stay in the
country were things I did not expect. Now, because of
Professor Shimizu, I like Japan, and in my mind all
Japanese people are kind.
Second, I admired Professor Shimizus knowledge.
One time I saw his great knowledge in action was when
a doctor in his department had a problem during an
operation on a patient who had retinal detachment.
The doctor wanted to repair the hole in the patients
retina but after he began to operate, he could not find
the hole; so, the doctor made an emergency call to
Professor Shimizu who helped the doctor find the hole,
and the operation was a success.
A third way that Professor Shimizu was a good
influence on me was in his work style. He worked very
hard, six days a week and came to work the earliest and
left the latest. His main work was as consultant for
residents and as teacher for medical students. This
kept him very busy, but he still found time to do a lot of
research in ophthalmology.
Finally, I admired Professor Shimizu because he
was a good boss. Even though he was head of the
department, he worked as hard as his subordinates.
Therefore, all of the staff loved and respected him.
During working hours he was strict, but after work he
always went out to relax with his staff. For example, he
liked to go out drinking and socializing with his subor-
dinates. This was a good way to unwind and develop
friendly relationships in the department.
I am an orthoptist now. I try to follow Professor
Shimizus example in several ways. First, I try to be
kind. Second, I try to study hard to have a lot of
knowledge. Third, I try to work hard. Last, if I have a
chance to be a boss, I will try to earn the love and
respect of my staff. In conclusion, I think I was very
lucky to know Professor Shimizu.
The author
George Jacobs is a lecturer in the English Department,
Faculty of Humanities, at Chiang Mai University in
Chiang Mai, Thailand. He has also taught in Beijing,
China and in the USA in Honolulu and Chicago. He
has an MA in Linguistics with a specialization in
TESOL from the University of Illinois-Chicago.
290 George Jacobs
articles welcome