Response to Emig’s ‘Non-Magical Thinking:...’

In ‘Non-Magical Thinking: Presenting Writing Developmentally in Schools,’ Janet Emig pushes my thinking about how I teach writing.  I tend to teach it in a linear fashion where we brainstorm ideas, make a web, make some notes about what happens first, in the middle and at the end, write a rough draft, revise, etc.  It doesn’t always happen that way in real life, though.  According to Emig, “We not only plan, then write, then revise, but we also revise, then plan, then write.” 

I also tend to give a lot of structure when having kids write which is not entirely bad.  Kids need structure and guidance, but I want to balance it out with more freedom and time to write what they want and how they want.  I don't have to give a prompt every time.

Emig says that “although writing is natural, it is activated by enabling environments.”  I’m wondering what kind of environments are enabling.  Is it giving kids some guidance or structure and then just letting them write?  Letting kids have more time to collaborate with other students/writers?  Letting them work at their own pace even if it is a snail’s pace?  Some kids never seem to finish anything I assign them.  Should I still give direct instruction on things like 6 traits?  I can see a need for some direct instruction, guided practice, and then independent practice.  How do I find the balance I’m looking for?