A cognitive Theory of writing, we've all heard before

flowers and hays tell us that the "act of writing" has three major elements: the task environment, the writers long term memory and the writing process, and all of these have sub elements and the sub elements have littler subs. This theory is Way different than Summers, because it is NOT linear, and it has SUB categories. Summers theory compared to Hays and Flowers is way off course, she only has pre-writing, writing, and rewriting, which as you can tell is different than the sophisticated three elements of writing task enviroment, the writers process and long term memory. what im trying to say here is they ain't the different, I agree one is more complex and has fancy sub categories, but the only difference seems to be that Hays and Flowers say their theory units all three steps into one....with sub categories. They argue that a "skilled" writer is constantly going through all three stages, which means there is no separation between the steps as Summers argues. It is a dynamic system that keeps happening through-out the writing process.
Anywho, the Writing task process is the topic, knowing your audience and all of the pre-writing activities that are involved, such as rough drafts and any ideas, thoughts or scribbles on the topic. The long term memory process is what we might call the out-lines of the paper, the knowledge one has one the given topic and the knowledge of the audience. The final process and the with the most subs in it, is the writing process, which includes: planing, translating and reviewing, or pre-writing, writing and re-writing. Planing would mean the organizing of the text and the "goal" the writer wants to set. Translating is simply translating everything in the first two steps and the planing process into paper, in laymen s terms, writing. The reviewing process is simply evaluating the text and revising the text.
Oh I forgot an important part, "the Monitor" which is process which "determines when the writer moves from one process to the next" (283) this is determined by our own personal writing habits and the topic on hand.
So basically the ideas are the same but now with a little Grey pou pon on it. We are learning something which i think comes naturally with being an experienced writer. I understand the want to explain writing in a simple to use diagram or theory, but what the authors are missing is the practice and experience needed to become a "skilled writer" comes with....well practise and experience and a liitle of talent and smarts.....run on sentence.