I am just through with Stephen Krashen’s book "Writing: Research, Theory, and Applications" and what further enlightenment i had on concepts such as reading-writing connection, Chomsky’s competence and performance, affective filter theory, and the like.
The book basically supports my assumption in my thesis proposal* that "the value of (explicit) instruction (of cognitive learning strategies) is that it can help writers develop good strategies for performance (often writing practice), not necessarily competence, more quickly and can help cure and prevent inefficient or ‘tangled’ composing processes" (Krashen).
To gain writing competence, the book strongly suggests the value of reading, reading, and reading. It is in reading that good writers acquire the "code", the English code, that is. One must have to be hooked on books (or whatever reading materials) first and foremost. "We gain competence in writing the same way we gain competence in oral language; by understanding messages in written language, and by reading for meaning."
Writing froficiency is better achieved via subconscious process (acquisition) rather than a conscious process (learning). To express one’s thoughts without restraint rather than paying too much attention on form and conventions of grammar is more effective. This supports the idea that low affective filter while doing the writing task gives more substance to the composition where ideas freely flow unhampered by rules that create obstruction and anxiety.
Makes sense to me. Note: Chomsky got the concepts of competence and performance from the Grammarians of Port-Royal (Paris).