Anderson and Noden discuss overlapping concepts in the instruction of grammar. However, they have somewhat different approaches. Anderson's instruction methods are oriented more to understanding sentences, where Noden's contribution revolves around adding specific grammatical elements--which would have to be committed to each student's memory before Noden's brushstroke method could be utilized.

Despite these different approaches, the two writings are compatible in terms of use in an educational setting. In fact, the two in unison may even be highly effective. Before that is discussed, however, I will attempt to condense both sections in 4-5 fundamental points, avoiding over-summary while retaining the relevant content and raw message.

From Anderson:
1. In order to help students understand what sentences are it is helpful to break complex sentences down to 2 words, those being the subject and action components.
2. From these simple sentences, complex sentences can be explained as the development of a single idea, which Anderson recommends encouraging students to visualize (the "mind movie" concept)
3. Teaching register swap/code-switching in the context of story dialogue will help students understand the importance of a formal register.
4. Speaking a sentence out loud facilitates student realization of the relationship between natural pauses during reader and speaking and comma use, and thereby teach the student effective use of the absolute.

And from Noden:
1. Encouraging vividity and specificity within student writing will encourage more creative and expressive writing.
2. In student writing, the "Mind Movie" concept may be utilized as a teaching tool to accomplish this goal (from Noden #1)
3. Drafting a more general text and filling in concrete details in a certain sequence may be an effective method of gradually expanding both a young writer's creative vocabularly and improve the impact of their writing.
4. Nearly any activity which encourages students to generate details or describe sensory stimulation can be useful in accomplishing the above goal (from Noden #3)

I am not particularly informed on the cognitive processes of children beyond Psychology class or two I have taken, but laying out Anderson and Noden in such a way as my list above seems, to me, to suggest an effective means of writing instruction which combines the two. The "mind movie" concept, revolving around mental pictures explained in the framework of a film camera, is relevant in the instructive methods of both textbooks. Anderson, however, places additional emphasis on speaking, which directs the focus back to the assembly of communicated ideas. This allows a student who is not particularly interested in creative writing to nonetheless maintain a strong working understanding of grammar and syntax, based on how they would comfortably speak a written sentence.

The two may even be related back to each other in a variation upon the "code-switching" system. Anderson stresses, in this section, the importance of contextually-appropriate language by asking students what the use of a double-negative in a job interview suggests to an employer. This encourages both a formal "code" and an informal "code." Noden's suggestions may be employed to encourage a sort of more expressive, artistic form of code which relies on vivid and specific imagery, where Anderson suggests a functional but more-condensed code for effective but still relatively general communication. The formal, informal and creative codes, introduced as 3 separate but related elements, could be used both as a way to divide lesson plans and to encourage student understanding of the different levels of communication without the process of code-switching seeming alien or confusing.