The myth that writing indicates natural intelligence starts as correct writing becomes a tool for ranking students and innate ability. Consequences include limiting how we understand intelligence, trusting tests instead of teachers, and trusting test results without understanding tests. Closer to the truth is that uniform tests and scales are not fair, and they tell us a 2-dimensional story about writing. Closer to the truth is that writing is 3-dimensional – social, diverse, and unnatural – and on a continuum rather than a scale.

Myth 7, that college writing ensures professional success, begins when popular magazines and university presidents start selling the idea that college education will lead to economic mobility. Consequences include that workplace writing is a “sink or swim” process for many new workers, while college assignments and courses are often limited to correct writing only. Closer to the truth is that college and workplace writing are different worlds, with different goals and tasks. Yet we can build metacognitive bridges between writing worlds, by exploring writing patterns within and across them.

The myth that tests must regulate writing starts in the 1800s as spoken, interactive examination ends, and written English exams begin. Its consequences include that every exam becomes an English exam, as correct writing is evaluated in everything from history to geography to English composition exams. Its consequences also include exam culture, at the expense of learning culture. Closer to the truth is that standardized test scores measure socioeconomic status, tests only test what is on tests, and exam tasks solicit a narrow continuum of writing.

The myth that only one kind of writing is correct is the foundation for all the myths that follow. It starts with early spelling standardization and continues with early usage guides. Its consequences include making enemies of formal and informal writing, and making people think correct writing means one thing – and means a capable and good person. Closer to the truth? Terrible writers can be good people, good writers can be terrible people, and all shared writing includes some fundamental similarities, and some differences. Formal writing fancies nouns more than verbs, for instance, and it likes informational subjects. Informal writing has more equal affection for nouns, verbs, pronouns, and adverbs, and it favors interpersonal subjects.

The myth that schools must regulate writing starts as English shifts to schools (away from home instruction), and schools shift to English (away from classical languages). Its consequences include making English regulation common and desirable, and making language variation a threat. Diverse ways of writing persist, but they aren’ studied in school. Closer to the truth is that language diversity and language knowledge are human rights, but school writing focuses only on a narrow part of a continuum of common ways of writing.

The myth that most students can't write begins with the very first college writing exams, then really emerges when headline news begin reporting standardized test results. Consequences include that test results define writing and writing failure, and we accept test-based claims and criteria. We make limited standards the same thing as excellent standards, and we think about writing in terms of control rather than practice. Closer to the truth is that early exam reports sometimes lied, errors are changing but not increasing, and tests and scoring criteria change. Standardized exam writing is limited, but most students write across a broad writing continuum when they are not writing standardized exams.

The book opens with an odd fact of our time: we grow up having our writing corrected at every turn, and yet the actual writing most people do goes far beyond what is considered “correct English.” If we imagine a basic continuum of writing in English, it ranges from informal to formal, personal to impersonal, and interpersonal to informational writing. That range allows us to do all kinds of different things with writing. But only a small part of it is considered “correct,” because of what the book calls Language Regulation Mode. The introduction explains Language Regulation Mode, how it fixates on errors, and how it makes it hard to think about writing any other way. We learn to see writing only through the lens of writing myths, which tell us only some writing counts, and only some writers are smart and will succeed. Then, the introduction offers an alternative: Language Exploration Mode, which focuses on patterns instead of errors, and learning more about the diverse language of our world today--a continuum of informal digital writing, workplace writing, formal school writing, and otherwise, all correct for its purpose.

Myth 6, writing should be mastered in secondary school, starts the same time as the myth that most students cannot write, in the 20th century. This myth limits how we think about writing development, including who we think is responsible for it. Other consequences include that we ignore important differences between secondary and college writing, like the fact that secondary writing tasks tend to be brief, persuasive, and rigidly organized, while college writing tends to be multi-step, explanatory, and organized according to topic and genre. Closer to the truth is that writing development is a spiral rather than a line: it is ongoing, and not everything comes together at once. Also closer to the truth is that we can support the move from secondary to college writing by exploring their writing continuum patterns.

The final myth, new technology threatens writing, brings us full circle back to myth 1, because it keeps limiting correct writing. It puts correct writing at odds with informal digital writing, even when correct writing is critiqued for being stodgy. We get the idea that correct writing is controlled, whereas informal digital writing is careless, and we limit who reads correct writing and what writing is studied in school. Closer to the truth is that if you are alarmed by something – say, text message slang – you will notice it more, even if most written English is neither changing nor fundamentally different. Informal writing is not the same thing as careless writing, and it is both similar and different from formal writing on the writing continuum.