Emergence of Criticality in Effective MA Students’ Research Papers: Appraisal...Lok Ming Eric Cheung
Abstract
Academic writing in English, especially construction of successful or effective academic papers, at a graduate level can be extremely demanding. Writing effective research papers requires “a critical perspective… that questions and evaluates knowledge” (Hood, 2004a, p. 5). According to a recent study in 2009/10, MA students in the Department of English at Hong Kong Polytechnic University expressed concerns about the challenges of writing research papers. This motivated the present study which aims to support academic literacy and to help students be “adequately inducted into the expectations of their academic community” (Hood, 2004b, p. 24).
This focus in this study is on the lexico-grammatical features in the “successful” MA research-based papers graded B+ or above. Evaluation and persuasion were found to be some of the key factors in these successful papers. In orders to analyse persuasion we draw on ATTITUDE from the Appraisal System (Martin & White, 2005) as a framework to situation successful academic writing. We have data from 26 MA research-based papers. We identify expressions of ATTITUDE, either explicitly or implicitly coded, in the effective papers, and discuss the difference in distribution of the attitudinal values across the generic stages.
The aim of the study is to support the students’ needs in the requirement to successfully employ academic literacy, particularly expressions of evaluative stance through effective attitudinal lexical choices. We aim to shed light on what is meant by the term “critical thinking” in tertiary education. We will present an online pedagogic resource, with materials on staging, grammatical metaphor, information flow, etc., which has been developed as a result of the present study.
Keywords:
References
Hood, S. (2004a). Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: a focus on the introductions to research reports. In L.J. Ravelli & R.A. Ellis (Eds.), Analysing academic writing (pp. 24-44). London: Continuum.
Hood, S. (2004b). Appraising Research: Taking a stance in academic writing (Doctoral dissertation). University of Technology, Sydney.
Hood, S. (2010). Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Martin, J. & White, P.R.R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: appraisal in English. London, Palgrave.
Emergence of Criticality in Effective MA Students’ Research Papers: Appraisal...Lok Ming Eric Cheung
Abstract
Academic writing in English, especially construction of successful or effective academic papers, at a graduate level can be extremely demanding. Writing effective research papers requires “a critical perspective… that questions and evaluates knowledge” (Hood, 2004a, p. 5). According to a recent study in 2009/10, MA students in the Department of English at Hong Kong Polytechnic University expressed concerns about the challenges of writing research papers. This motivated the present study which aims to support academic literacy and to help students be “adequately inducted into the expectations of their academic community” (Hood, 2004b, p. 24).
This focus in this study is on the lexico-grammatical features in the “successful” MA research-based papers graded B+ or above. Evaluation and persuasion were found to be some of the key factors in these successful papers. In orders to analyse persuasion we draw on ATTITUDE from the Appraisal System (Martin & White, 2005) as a framework to situation successful academic writing. We have data from 26 MA research-based papers. We identify expressions of ATTITUDE, either explicitly or implicitly coded, in the effective papers, and discuss the difference in distribution of the attitudinal values across the generic stages.
The aim of the study is to support the students’ needs in the requirement to successfully employ academic literacy, particularly expressions of evaluative stance through effective attitudinal lexical choices. We aim to shed light on what is meant by the term “critical thinking” in tertiary education. We will present an online pedagogic resource, with materials on staging, grammatical metaphor, information flow, etc., which has been developed as a result of the present study.
Keywords:
References
Hood, S. (2004a). Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: a focus on the introductions to research reports. In L.J. Ravelli & R.A. Ellis (Eds.), Analysing academic writing (pp. 24-44). London: Continuum.
Hood, S. (2004b). Appraising Research: Taking a stance in academic writing (Doctoral dissertation). University of Technology, Sydney.
Hood, S. (2010). Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Martin, J. & White, P.R.R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: appraisal in English. London, Palgrave.
This paper outlined a research project combining lecturer interviews and review/evaluation of existing materials to identify key features of academic oral presentations which in turn led to the development of a comprehensive academic oral presentation course.
Colloquium with Drs. Catherine Crosby, Lynn Goldstein, Ditlev Larsen and Brian Morgan. Discussing how future teachers learn to write within their PST programs.
Is the students’ lack of enthusiasm for reading a fact of life or can we do s...Samantha Oakley
Materials used for the Swansea University SALT Conference 2013 Round Table session. The aim was to stimulate debate on student reading and how to encourage it. We had a packed, lively session - hope everyone enjoyed it as much as I did!
Note: the slides were printed on A4 in colour with a set of quotes/ideas to tackle the issue back-to-back. This was used as the focus for discussion.
Building the Foundation for Rigorous ELA Instructioncatapultlearn
This webinar presented by Jessica Bianculli, will discuss how to build a foundation for rigorous instruction—specifically, what systems need to be in place to support student academic success.
Participants will discuss:
The need for a consistent, school-wide instructional model
The emphasis on building knowledge across disciplines with a focus on informational text
How direct instruction of academic vocabulary can increase student comprehension of rigorous text
A 2 day seminar with 17 rural schools in Manitoba considering a systems look at reading growth. Day one the discussion focused on the what and why of our assessments while day two moved toward how to use the data we collect as part of our planning and instruction.
Material Development of English Subject that Promotes Students’ Engagement an...Rd Adelina
This is a power point presentation of mine and my friend's when we did our presentation at MELTA Conference in Kuching 2012. For the complete paper you can contact us by email. You can find our emails on the last slide.
Oral Reading Fluency Research : ED 520: Implementing Solutions for School-wide Effective Reading Instruction. American College of Education, November 2, 2012. To be presented at PEAK Teachers Conference, Kuwait, December 8, 2012.
This paper outlined a research project combining lecturer interviews and review/evaluation of existing materials to identify key features of academic oral presentations which in turn led to the development of a comprehensive academic oral presentation course.
Colloquium with Drs. Catherine Crosby, Lynn Goldstein, Ditlev Larsen and Brian Morgan. Discussing how future teachers learn to write within their PST programs.
Is the students’ lack of enthusiasm for reading a fact of life or can we do s...Samantha Oakley
Materials used for the Swansea University SALT Conference 2013 Round Table session. The aim was to stimulate debate on student reading and how to encourage it. We had a packed, lively session - hope everyone enjoyed it as much as I did!
Note: the slides were printed on A4 in colour with a set of quotes/ideas to tackle the issue back-to-back. This was used as the focus for discussion.
Building the Foundation for Rigorous ELA Instructioncatapultlearn
This webinar presented by Jessica Bianculli, will discuss how to build a foundation for rigorous instruction—specifically, what systems need to be in place to support student academic success.
Participants will discuss:
The need for a consistent, school-wide instructional model
The emphasis on building knowledge across disciplines with a focus on informational text
How direct instruction of academic vocabulary can increase student comprehension of rigorous text
A 2 day seminar with 17 rural schools in Manitoba considering a systems look at reading growth. Day one the discussion focused on the what and why of our assessments while day two moved toward how to use the data we collect as part of our planning and instruction.
Material Development of English Subject that Promotes Students’ Engagement an...Rd Adelina
This is a power point presentation of mine and my friend's when we did our presentation at MELTA Conference in Kuching 2012. For the complete paper you can contact us by email. You can find our emails on the last slide.
Oral Reading Fluency Research : ED 520: Implementing Solutions for School-wide Effective Reading Instruction. American College of Education, November 2, 2012. To be presented at PEAK Teachers Conference, Kuwait, December 8, 2012.
Looking Behind the Curtain: using technology to facilitate & assess group ess...Peter Levrai
This is our presentation from the IATEFL / ZHAW Conference, 30th June 2018, discussing how we located different e-tools into an collaborative essay assignment.
The Intersection between Professor Expectations and Student Interpretations o...Melanie Parlette-Stewart
Numerous studies exist on how and to what extent course instructors in higher education are embedding or directly teaching writing, learning and research skills in their courses (Cilliers, 2011; Crosthwaite et al., 2006; and Mager and Sproken-Smith, 2014). Yet, disparity within the literature demonstrates that there is no consistent approach to the scaffolded development of these necessary skills within courses, programs, disciplines, or across disciplines. Preliminary research has also revealed that professor communication of expected or required student skills is often limited or unclear (McGuinnes, 2006).
Through a collaborative research project at the University of Guelph, we employed a multidisciplinary and multi-skill approach to explore the intersection between professor articulation and student interpretation of academic skills. Through this research, we have identified that, in the teaching and learning in third year university courses, discrepancies exist
a. between the learning, writing and research skills professors expect students to possess and the skills students think they possess when they enter the course;
b. in professor articulation of skills they will teach in their course and which skills they expect students to develop outside of class time;
c. in the skills students seek to develop based on their interpretation of the course outline; and
d. in students’ ability to identify necessary skills before and after taking these courses.
Based on these findings, we recommend that a curriculum-based approach to understanding the skill development needs of students can assist in bridging the gap between professor expectations and student interpretations of skill requirements.
Throughout this research presentation, we will present an overview of our research project; present our key findings; offer initial interpretations on student understandings of course outlines; demonstrate the value of cross-unit and cross-departmental collaborations; and offer recommendations and potential areas for further research. After our presentation, we will welcome dialogue and questions.
Oral Presentation Tasks: Making use of the Trojan horsePeter Levrai
This presentation looked at the benefits of using oral presentation tasks and what the expectations should be of academically sound presentations. It then discussed different activities and strategies that could be used to exploit presentation tasks to their fullest.
Competently Brought to Life - Bringing The Competency Framework for EAP Teach...Steve Kirk
This was a workshop delivered at 'The Janus Moment', BALEAP Biennial Conference (20 April 2013), together with colleagues from the Universities of Glasgow and Reading. We looked at ways of bringing alive the Competency Framework for EAP Teachers (CFTEAP) for teacher development.
Session Summary:
Putting theory and research into practice is a challenge in any context. Doing it in a way that is transferable to a variety of contexts provides an even greater level of challenge. It could be argued that this situation applies to the Competency Framework for Teachers of English for Academic Purposes (CFTEAP), published in 2008.
After three years of development the framework has gone on to provide excellent guidance for the professional development of teachers, and those responsible for training them. However, there is further scope to make the framework a practical resource for both teachers and teacher trainers. This practical workshop will look at concrete examples of materials that enact certain CFTEAP criteria to help teachers demonstrate their knowledge and progress in EAP. It will also look at materials that can be used by teacher trainers in facilitating the development of others.
The first part of the workshop will take a hands-on look at materials produced to help teachers structure both their study of EAP and development as an EAP practitioner. The materials provide a framework within which teachers can develop their knowledge and skills in a staged and scaffolded way.
The second part will look at a set of materials that have been developed for use by teacher trainers to provide help and guidance to early career professionals.
Finally, reactions and comments will be gathered from the workshop participants in order to feed into the further development and completion of this resource.
Time is of the essence: Making the most of what you've gotPeter Levrai
This presentation considered the motivation for redeveloping an EAP course and provided an overview of the development of the course, which was influenced by the concept of Backward Design. In line with the theme of the conference the relationship between materials and teacher motivation was also considered.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
We all have good and bad thoughts from time to time and situation to situation. We are bombarded daily with spiraling thoughts(both negative and positive) creating all-consuming feel , making us difficult to manage with associated suffering. Good thoughts are like our Mob Signal (Positive thought) amidst noise(negative thought) in the atmosphere. Negative thoughts like noise outweigh positive thoughts. These thoughts often create unwanted confusion, trouble, stress and frustration in our mind as well as chaos in our physical world. Negative thoughts are also known as “distorted thinking”.
Synthetic Fiber Construction in lab .pptxPavel ( NSTU)
Synthetic fiber production is a fascinating and complex field that blends chemistry, engineering, and environmental science. By understanding these aspects, students can gain a comprehensive view of synthetic fiber production, its impact on society and the environment, and the potential for future innovations. Synthetic fibers play a crucial role in modern society, impacting various aspects of daily life, industry, and the environment. ynthetic fibers are integral to modern life, offering a range of benefits from cost-effectiveness and versatility to innovative applications and performance characteristics. While they pose environmental challenges, ongoing research and development aim to create more sustainable and eco-friendly alternatives. Understanding the importance of synthetic fibers helps in appreciating their role in the economy, industry, and daily life, while also emphasizing the need for sustainable practices and innovation.
Students, digital devices and success - Andreas Schleicher - 27 May 2024..pptxEduSkills OECD
Andreas Schleicher presents at the OECD webinar ‘Digital devices in schools: detrimental distraction or secret to success?’ on 27 May 2024. The presentation was based on findings from PISA 2022 results and the webinar helped launch the PISA in Focus ‘Managing screen time: How to protect and equip students against distraction’ https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/managing-screen-time_7c225af4-en and the OECD Education Policy Perspective ‘Students, digital devices and success’ can be found here - https://oe.cd/il/5yV
Instructions for Submissions thorugh G- Classroom.pptxJheel Barad
This presentation provides a briefing on how to upload submissions and documents in Google Classroom. It was prepared as part of an orientation for new Sainik School in-service teacher trainees. As a training officer, my goal is to ensure that you are comfortable and proficient with this essential tool for managing assignments and fostering student engagement.
Writing a collaboration of teachers, families, and children um-dearborn research colloquium_april 10, 2013_de_fauw
1. Writing: A Collaboration of
Teachers, Families and Children
Danielle L. DeFauw, Ph.D.
daniellp@umich.edu
Michigan Reading Association 58th
Annual Conference
March 16, 2014
2. Items of Discussion
• Background
• Extensive Course Description
• Mentor Text
• Case Study
• Next Steps
• Questions
3. Background
• Need to prepare preservice and inservice teachers
to teach writing to students of all ages (National
Commission on Writing, 2003)
• 27% of 8th
graders and 12th
graders performed
proficiently on the NAEP writing assessment
(National Center for Education Statistics, 2012)
• Personal Experience
– Course Work
– Oakland University’s Reading Clinic
5. CAEP (2013)
• Standard 1:
– CONTENT AND PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE
• The provider ensures that candidates develop a deep
understanding of the critical concepts and principles of
their discipline and, by completion, are able to use
discipline-specific practices flexibly to advance the
learning of all students toward attainment of college and
career-readiness standards.
6. CAEP (2013)
• Standard 2:
– CLINICAL PARTNERSHIPS AND PRACTICE
• The provider ensures that effective partnerships and high-
quality clinical practice are central to preparation so that
candidates develop the knowledge, skills and dispositions
necessary to demonstrate positive impact on all P-12
students’ learning.
7. Required Reading
Anderson, C. (2000). How's it going?: A practical guide to conferring with
student writers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Dorfman, L. R., & Cappelli, R. (2009). Nonfiction mentor texts: Teaching
informational writing through children’s literature K-8. Portland, ME:
Stenhouse Publishers.
Portalupi, J., & Fletcher, R. J. (2004). Teaching the qualities of writing:
Ideas, design, language, presentation. Portsmouth, NH: Firsthand.
Heard, G. (2002). The revision toolbox: Teaching techniques that work.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Rief, L. (2003). 100 quickwrites: Fast and effective freewriting exercises that
build students’ confidence, develop their fluency, and bring out the
writer in every student. New York, NY: Scholastic.
Young, J. (2010). R is for rhyme. (Illus. V. Juhasz). Chelsea, MI: Sleeping
Bear Press.
8. Online Lectures & Articles
Session I
•Teach writing! But I hate to write!
•Writing Workshop: The what, how, when, and why
– DeFauw, D. L. (2011). A challenge to write. The Reading Teacher, 64(5),
374. doi: 10.1598/RT.64.5.11
– Engel, T., & Streich, R. (2006). Yes, there is room for soup in the
curriculum: Achieving accountability in a collaboratively planned writing
program. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 660-679.
9. Online Lectures & Articles
Session II
•The Heart of Reading Workshop: The Writing Conference
•Writing Details for Fiction Using Mentor Text
– Sturgell, I. (2008). Touchstone texts: Fertile ground for creativity. The
Reading Teacher, 61(5), 411-414. doi:10.1598/RT.61.5.5
– Rickards, D., & Hawes, S. (2006). Connecting reading and writing through
author's craft. The Reading Teacher, 60(4), 370-373.
10. Online Lectures & Articles
Session III
•The art of supporting unmotivated writers
•Revision! It’s hard enough to get my students to complete a rough
draft!
– Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Fink-Chorzempa, B., & MacArthur, C. (2003).
Primary grade teachers’ instructional adaptations for struggling writers: A
national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 279-292.
– Smede, S. D. (2000). Interior design: Revision as focus. English Journal,
90(10), 117-121.
11. Online Lectures & Articles
Session IV
•The Details of Poetry
Session V
•Writing Details for Nonfiction Using Mentor Text
– Morgan, D. N. (2010), Writing feature articles with intermediate students. The Reading
Teacher, 64(3), 181-189. doi:10.1598/RT.64.3.3
12. Online Lectures & Articles
Session VI
•Authentic Writing for Test Preparation – Is that even possible?
– DeFauw, D. L. (2013). 10 writing opportunities to “teach to the test.” The
Reading Teacher 66(7), 569-573. doi:10.1002/TRTR.1161
– Duke, N. K., Purcell-Gates, V., Hall, L. A., & Tower, C. (2006). Authentic
literacy activities for developing comprehension and writing. The Reading
Teacher, 60(4), 344-355.
– Graves, D. H. (2004).What I’ve learned from teachers of writing.
Language Arts, 82(2), 88-94.
13. Online Lectures & Articles
Session VII
•Writing Rubrics: Inform Your Teaching
– Andrade, H. L. (formerly Andrade, H. G.), Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting
rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced
self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational
Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(2), 3-13.
– Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity
and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2(2), 130-144.
– Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). The scope of writing assessment. Assessing Writing, 8(1),
5-16.
– Romeo, L. (2008). Informal writing assessment linked to instruction: A continuous
process for teachers, students, and parents. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 24(1),
25-51.
– Ruttle, K. (2004). What goes on inside my head when I'm writing? A case study of
8-9-year-old boys. Literacy, 38(2), 71-77.
14. EXPS 498/598 Course Schedule
• Exploring Writing with Children & Adolescents
– Writing Workshop
• 60 minutes
– Focus / Mini Lesson
» Mentor Text
– Independent Writing (Conferencing)
– Share
– Writing Clinic
• 6:10 – 7:30
15. Writing Clinic
• 15 students invited from an elementary school
– Academic Service Learning
• EXPS 498/598 students teach the elementary
students
• Family members of the elementary students
work with the professor
– Writing Tips to support home – school connections
16. Theoretical Framework
• Social Learning/Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1977)
– Modeling
• Teachers & Families
– Self-efficacy (Graham et al., 2001)
• Modeling writing (Atwell, 1998, Graves, 1983,
Murray, 1985)
19. Literature Review
• Few universities require teachers complete a writing
methods course (National Commission on Writing,
2003)
– Examples (Grisham & Wolsey, 2011; Morgan, 2010)
• Secondary teachers’ experiences (Street & Stang, 2008)
• Elementary teachers’ experiences (Fearn & Farnan, 2007;
Pardo, 2006)
– Three preservice teachers completed a field experience (Stockinger,
2007)
20. Questions
• What understandings and perceptions do preservice
and inservice teachers have about themselves as
writers and teaching writing prior to engaging in
EXPS 498/598, Exploring Writing with Children &
Adolescents?
• How will preservice and inservice teachers’
understandings and perceptions change by the end
of the course?
21. Data Sources
• Surveys (Gallavan, Bowles, & Young, 2007)
– EXPS 498/598 Students (pre & post)
– Student Teachers (April 2013 & Dec. 2013)
• Interviews (Street, 2003)
• Video & Audio Recordings
– Class Sessions
• Documents
22. Surveys
• Feelings toward writing process
– Personal
– Students
• Agree/Disagree: Teacher educators express
concerns that teacher candidates are not
proficient in their knowledge, skills, and
dispositions to [the following writing concerns]:
23. Survey: Writing Concerns
1. Write correctly and clearly
2. Communicate effectively through various
writing formats.
3. Teach writing appropriately to preK-12
students.
24. Survey: Writing Concerns
4. Integrate writing authentically across the
curriculum.
5. Guide preK-12 student writing supportively as
essential for learning and living.
6. Reflect personally and professionally through
writing.
25. Survey: Items III & IV
• Give a rationale for your response of agree or
disagree and/or a reaction to the writing
concern.
• Give suggestions to improve this writing-related
concern.
27. Interview Questions
(Street, 2003)
• Describe
– yourself as a writer
– positive / negative writing experience
– easiest / hardest part of writing
– kind of writing do you do just for you?
• What makes a piece of writing excellent?
• Professional contributions
• How do you think you will most help writers?
28. Documents: Graded Assignments
*Assignment EXPS 498 EXXPS 598
Writing History Essay No Grade No Grade
*Writer’s Notebook with Try-It Tasks 5% 5%
*Group Unit of Study / Focus Lessons /
Mentor Texts
20% 10%
Publishing Opportunities 5% 5%
Conferencing Notebook 20% 10%
LibraryThing.com 5% 5%
*Narrative Piece 5% 5%
*Expository Piece 5% 5%
*Poetry Piece 5% 5%
Model Focus Lesson NA 5%
*Field Note Journal 10% 5%
M-Portfolio / Reflection 20% 10%
Final Project NA 30%
31. Survey
• Data for Item I: Teacher Candidates’ Feelings
About Writing and the Writing Process
– How do you feel about writing and the writing
process? (pre/post); (50 student teachers)
• Highly Value (5/5); (90%) Somewhat value (1/0); (10%);
Do not value (0/0); (0%)
– How do you feel about writing and the writing
process for your students? (pre/post); (50 student
teachers)
• Highly Value (5/5); (94%) Somewhat value (1/1); (6%); Do
not value (0/0); (0%)
32. Survey Continued
Data for Items II & III
•Write correctly and clearly. (pre/post); (50 student
teachers)
– Agree (2/3); (72%); Disagree (4/2); (28%)
A: “Educators are continuously progressing their
knowledge and skills…PD, PLC, etc.”
D: “I feel like there is not enough preparation for
teachers to teach writing.” “There are no courses
related to writing – to teaching it.”
33. Survey Continued
Data for Items II & III
•Communicate effectively through various writing
formats. (pre/post); (50 student teachers)
– Agree (1/3); (64%); Disagree (5/2); (36%)
• A: “Teachers communicate effectively daily with their…
instruction.” “Teachers are able to communicate through
various formats.”
• D: “Teachers are not provided enough information on
teaching writing and…[so they] teach how they were taught.”
“The candidates may not be familiar with the formats or may
misinterpret the directions.” “I have received many emails…
poorly written.”
34. Survey Continued
Data for Items II & III
•Teach writing appropriately for preK-12 students.
(pre/post); (50 student teachers)
– Agree (3/1); (45%); Disagree (2/4); (55%)
• A: “Teachers are able to teach writing…they may not feel…
prepared for it.” “Depends on the subject area and grade…”
“You can’t sum all teachers in one summary.”
• D: “Some teachers have learned to lecture instead of model.”
“We are simply thrown ‘the latest and greatest’ new tool
without much instruction in how to use it.” “…not enough
training in how to teach writing and/or do not write enough for
themselves.
35. Survey Continued
Data for Items II & III
•Integrate writing authentically across the
curriculum. (pre/post); (50 student teachers)
– Agree (1/1); (45%); Disagree (5/4); (55%)
• A: “…through their various forms of informal assessments,
writing notebooks, letters to the community…”
• D: “time consuming”
• D: “We’re told to do it and not how.”
36. Survey Continued
Data for Items II & III
•Guide preK-12 student writing supportively as
essential for learning and living. (pre/post) (50
student teachers)
– Agree (2/3); (54%); Disagree (4/2); (46%)
• A: “All of us stress the importance of…writing as a key…of
survival in the world.” “…connecting real-world concepts…”
“Writing goes to the wayside when teachers get busy.”
• D: “Writing can seem like…a dueling task…to many teachers
who are not comfortable with it.”
• D: “Teachers tend to ‘grade’ writing instead of offering
guidance.”
37. Survey Continued
Data for Items II & III
•Reflect personally and professionally through
writing. (pre/post); (50 student teachers)
– Agree (3/4); (78%); Disagree (2/1); (22%); No
response (1/0)
• A: “I write 2 weekly blogs reflecting on my personal and
professional experience.” “There is not a lesson that I am not
expected to reflect on.”
• D: “Teachers view writing as busy work rather than an
opportunity to reflect (as witnessed at PDs).”
• D: “Some may write ‘robotically’ in a dry manner as to appear
professional.”
38. Survey Continued
Data for Item IV
•Give suggestions to improve this writing-related
concern.
– Provide professional development and courses on
writing workshop & professional communication.
– Teach writing strategies
• Integrate across the curriculum
– Writing assignments for reflection and in various
genres
– Allow for more collaboration
39. Pre-Interview
Participants Attitudes Toward
Writing
Self-Confidence
Regarding Writing
School Writing
Experiences
Shelly improving but
reluctant
developing generally poor until
college
Elizabeth improving but
reluctant
developing generally poor until
college
Megan improving but
anxious
developing positive
Debbie improving with
excitement
developing generally poor until
this course
Avery positive high generally poor
Julie positive high positive
40. Positive & Negative Experiences
• Only 1 student shared positive high school
writing experiences, which focused on teachers’
perceptions of her writing ability.
• 4/6 students shared positive college writing
experiences, all in narrative genres.
41. Easy & Hard Aspects
• Easy aspects included personal expression,
organization for some, and idea generation.
• Hard aspects included grammar, format, topic
interest, voice, and lack of time.
– “…allowing [my] voice to come through and…
grabbing [my] reader’s attention.”
42. Personal Uses of Writing
• Reflection on personal matters
• Letters to parents, administrators
• College assignments
– “I think that one of the reasons that I like to write
personally is because I write about things that move
me, things that I’m passionate about, things that I
care about….when I’m writing for an assignment…I
lose some of that emotion…passion and…rawness.”
43. Strengths & Weaknesses
• Strengths included feeling they could motivate
students to write through free topic choice and
patience.
– “I have positive energy and great topic ideas that
spark their interest.”
• Weaknesses included teaching the writers and
not the writing, grading, knowing what to teach
and how to teach.
– “I struggle with helping them generate their own
46. Writing Workshop
1. “I have realized that a writing workshop does
not seem impossible like I once thought.”
2. “Any writing issue can be made into a focus
lesson.”
3. “I need to perfect the length of my focus
lessons…most of the time should be devoted
to independent writing.”
47. Mentor Text
4. “Never did I think to use great reading to teach
great writing!”
5. “Whenever you read new material read it like a
writer. Think of ways you can use the
material to teach your students about writing.”
6. “Teaching non-fiction doesn’t always have to
involve stale books.”
48. Teacher as Model
7. “So in a way just me writing more has opened
my eyes to helping kids just letting them write.”
8. “You need to model and show your students
how a good writer revises.”
9. “Keeping [a writer’s notebook] for myself is
extremely valuable…my students’ eyes light
up…[when] I ask them ‘Do you mind if I
share some of my writing with you?’”
49. Teacher as Model
10.“Modeling is extremely important especially in
my writer’s notebook with my personal stories.
Sharing these personal moments really
helps…writing [come] ‘alive’ and draws my
students in.”
50. Personal Writing
11.“[Mentor texts] play an important role in my
writing, students’ writing, and teaching.”
12.“Write. Write to improve your writing and to be
an example to your students.”
13.“I want…to share my writing so [my students]
will be encouraged to write.”
51. Implications
• Preservice and inservice teachers need to learn
writing instruction methodology.
• University instruction must challenge and
positively influence students’ writing attitudes.
53. Literature Review
• Writing clinic for parents of teens
– (Fleischer & Pavlock, 2011)
• Writing clinic for parents of middle school
students
– (McClay et al., 2012)
• Reading Clinic with Elementary Students
– (DeFauw & Burton, 2008-09)
54. Questions
• What understandings and perceptions do families of
the children participating in the writing clinic have
about their children’s writing development?
• How will families’ understanding and perceptions
change by the end of the focus group sessions?
55. Data Sources
• Field Note Journal
• Video & Audio Recordings
• Documents
– Lesson Plans
– Family Writing Samples
57. Session I
• Introduction
• What do you hope to get out of this experience?
• What are your questions?
– Surprises
• Writer’s Notebooks
• Dialogue Journals
• Mother & Daughter Connection
58. Session II
• Shannon, D. (2008). Too many toys. New York,
NY: The Blue Sky Press.
– Freewrite
– Discussed connections to various genres
• (i.e., narrative, informational, how-to, opinion, persuasive)
59. Session III & IV
• Lloyd-Jones, S. (2011). How to be a baby…by
me, the big sister. (Illus. S. Heap). New York,
NY: Dragonfly Books.
– Shared writing
• How to be a kid
• Read, Reread, List, Compose
– Strategy to support nonfiction writing from sources
60. Session V
• Nonfiction writing tips
– Review various nonfiction books
– Discuss nonfiction text features
– Discuss opinion vs. fact
61. Session VI
• The stories that bind us (Feiler, 2013)
– Write letters to our children
• Author Celebration
62. Implications
• Families are their children’s first teachers.
– Modeling
• Supporting home – school connections
• Families want to help their children
– Provide strategies & support
64. Literature Review
• Writing process approach (Atwell, 1998;
Graves, 1983; Murray, 1985)
• Mentor text (Dorfman & Cappelli, 2009)
• Self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977; Pajares, 1996)
65. Writing Clinic for Students
• EXPS 498/598 students select two genres to
explore:
– Poetry or narrative
– Nonfiction
• Explanatory / informational
• opinion / persuasive
66. Questions
• How will children’s writing abilities change from
participating in the writing clinic?
• How will students’ understanding and perceptions
change by the end of the writing clinic?
67. Data Sources
• Writing Attitude Survey (Kear et al., 2000)
• Writing Interview (Atwell, 1998)
• Video & Audio Recordings
– Writing Celebration (April 18, 2013)
– After session discussions with EXPS 498/598
students
• Documents
• EXPS 498/598 Field Note Journals
68. Learning From Our Students
• “I was so nervous to work with them, but with
the books, it’s not nearly as hard as I thought it
would be.”
• “She’s so quiet and won’t even talk to me. But
she did read me her poetry.”
• “There’s so much that’s hurting her that she
needs to write.”
• “She can’t wait to read her writing to her mom.”
70. EXPS 498/598
• Continue this study
– Course offerings
• Preservice teachers’ attitudes toward writing measuring
tool (Hall & Grisham-Brown, 2011)
– Student teachers (Hall & Grisham-Brow, 2011;
Street, 2003)
– New teachers
• Focus on nonfiction writing
• Quantitative writing studies
– (Newell et al., 2013)
71. More Questions than Answers
• How do we impact children’s writing attitudes?
• How will student teaching and the first years of
teaching be impacted by writing assessment?
• Do teachers have to identify themselves as
writers to teach writing?
• Questions & Comments?
72. References
Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle (2nd
ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). (2013). Commission on standards
and performance reporting. [Incomplete citation]
DeFauw, D. L., & Burton, E. L. (2008-09). Listening to the parents of struggling readers: An
analysis of a parent focus group. Michigan Reading Journal, 41(1), 30-38.
Fearn, L., & Farnan, N. (2007). The influence of professional development on young writers’
writing performance. Action in Teacher Education, 29(2), 17-28.
Feiler, B. (March 17, 2013). The stories that bind us. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://
www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/fashion/the-family-stories-that-bind-us-this-life.html?
emc=eta1&_r=0
Fleischer, C., & Pavlock, K. C. (2012). Inviting parents in: Expanding our community base to
support writing. English Journal, 101(4), 29-36.
Gallavan, N. P., Bowles, F. A., Young, C. T. (2007). Learning to write and writing to learn: Insights
from teacher candidates. Action in Teacher Education, 29(2), 61-69.
73. References
Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., Fink, B., & MacArthur, C. A. (2001). Teacher efficacy in writing: A
construct validation with primary grade teachers. Scientific Studies of Reading, 56,
177-202.
Grisham, D. L., & Wosley, T. D. (2011). Writing instruction for teacher candidates: Strengthening a
weak curricular area. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50, 348-364.
Hall, A., & Grisham-Brown, J. (2011). Writing development over time: Examining preservice
teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about writing. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher
Education, 32(2), 148-158.
Kear, D. J., Coffman, G. A., McKenna, M. C., & Abrosio, A. L. (2000). Measuring attitude toward
writing: A new tool for teachers. The Reading Teacher, 54(1), 10 – 23.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
McClay, J. K., Peterson, S. S., & Nixon, R. (2012). Parents and communities as partners in teaching
writing in Canadian middle school classrooms. Middle School Journal, 44(1), 44-52.
74. References
Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education (2nd ed.). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Merton, R. K., Fiske, M., & Kendall, P. L. (1956). The focused interview: A manual of problems and
procedures. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Morgan, D. N. (2010). Preservice teachers as writers. Literacy Research and Instruction, 49,
352-365.
Murray, D. (1985). A writer teaches writing (2nd
ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012, September). The nation’s report card: Writing.
Retrieved February 2, 2013, from nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/
main2011/2012470.asp
National Commission on Writing. (2003, April). The neglected R: The need for a writing revolution.
Washington, DC: College Entrance Examination Board. Retrieved August 22, 2009, from
www.collegeboard.com/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdf
75. References
Newell, G., VanDerheide, J., Bradley, A., Goff, B., Weyand, L., Olsen, A. A., Ryu, S. (2013,
February). Recontextualizing as teaching: Using instructional chains to study argumentative
writing instruction. Paper presented at the National Council of Teachers of English
Assembly of Research, Columbus, OH.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66
(4), 543-578.
Pardo, L. S. (2006). The role of context in learning to teach writing: What teacher educators need
to know to support beginning urban teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4),
378-394.
Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage
handbook of qualitative researcher (3rd
ed., pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Stockinger, P. C. (2007). Living in, learning from, looking back, breaking through in English
language arts methods courses: A case study of two preservice teachers. English
Education, 39(3), 201-225.
76. References
Street, C. (2003). Pre-service teachers' attitudes about writing and learning to teach writing:
Implications for teacher educators. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(3), 33-50.
Street, C., & Stang, K. (2008). Improving the teaching of writing across the curriculum: A model
for teaching in-service secondary teachers to write. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1),
37-49.
Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Editor's Notes
Date: Time:
Saturday 1:30 PM - 2:30 PM
Room Capacity: Building:
Haldane - 100 Amway Grand Plaza Hotel
I wish to thank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to listen to my presentation entitled Teaching Writing: A Collaboration of Teachers, Families and Children.
For this research colloquium, I will begin with sharing the background experience and thinking that has propelled my thinking about this research to this point.
I will provide an extensive course description because without such a description, understanding the research might be a bit challenging Plus this study really is a descriptive case study to share how I choosing to run this course.
I will model for you the use of a mentor text to demonstrate what my the teachers, families and students are experiencing through the writing workshops.
We’ll talk at length about where I am in the research process in looking at the case study from all three viewpoints.
I’ll share with you the next steps I plan to take with this study and questions I am considering.
I do want this presentation to be informal. Please feel entirely welcomed to ask questions and make comments as I proceed through the different slides.
“National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges was established in 2002 to focus national attention on the teaching and learning of writing. The first report issued by this commission was titled The Neglected “R”: The Need for a Writing Revolution (Sterling, 2003). The goal driving this report was to focus attention on the importance of writing for all students in the 21st century. The report recommended increasing writing time substantially and providing resources to make increased instructional time possible (Sterling). The National Commission on Writing website describes this report’s recommendations along with resources to help teachers achieve these goals (http://www.writingcommission.org/). Richard Sterling, past director of the National Writing Project, suggests that policy statements and classroom practice are not often closely linked. He believes that it is the creative and thoughtful ideas of teachers that drive the shift towards making writing a priority in early childhood classrooms (Sterling)” (Graham et al., 2013)
“Center for Education Statistics (2012) reveal that less than a third of students in the United States have mastered the skills necessary for proficient, or grade level appropriate writing on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Most of our students in the United States have scored at the basic level or below, which denotes only partial mastery of the writing skills needed at each grade. A deteriorating attitude toward writing across the grades has also been reported” (Graham et al., 2013)
I find it shocking that as a literacy professional who has earned literacy degrees from undergraduate to doctoral, that I have taken half a dozen writing courses all of which allowed me to respond to writing assignments, some in a workshop format, but none of them taught me, aside through experience, how to teach writing to my students. I have never taken a writing methodology course. In fact, even as I chose to create a writing minor for my doctorate, I was encouraged to complete independent studies to explore my identity as a teacher writer.
The professional development I have led focuses on how to teach writing. Writing assessment forces us too often into comfortable formulaic writing that is school related solely.
I aim to improve writing instruction skills for preservice and inservice teachers to impact not only the struggling writers they will support through the writing clinic, but ultimately impact the innumerable students they’ll teach throughout their careers. Through their participation in the course, teachers will experience firsthand a writing workshop framework, develop their teacher-writer voices, and develop strategies for implementing research-based writing instruction.
Students will benefit from receiving tutoring support and parents benefit from the instruction I provde to them while their children are receiving tutoring.
Read pages 16 – 19 for Standards 1 & 2.
Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). (2013). Commission on Standards and Performance Reporting. [Incomplete citation]
5 books
1 picture book
15 articles
10 online lectures
Model use of a mentor text. Use one of Nicola Davies books.
In developing a writing clinic, similar to many reading clinics used to teach reading methods and diagnosis, University of Michigan-Dearborn will not only support teachers through a semester long course solely on writing instruction, a rarity, but even more importantly allow preservice and inservice teachers to develop an understanding of how to implement such writing strategies with struggling writers. Children and families participating in the writing clinic will also benefit greatly, and research in such a collaboration specifically related to writing has not been explored in the research literature.
Modeling a key component to much of what we do in education. Students learn from their teachers’ modeling. Modeling is also very important in writing instruction. We expect teachers to model effective writing, but much of what we often expect them of them is to transfer their personal experiences as being writers, pulling from their school writing experiences, to teach others how to write. As Deborah Ball discussed at another colloquium earlier this year, there is so much that we do to orchestrate our instruction that we rarely name. There is so much more to understand in learning to teach writing then just our experiences with writing, which for too many teachers is negative.
Pass out surveys for everyone to view while I go over the next few slides and then they’ll discuss with partners.
Street, C. (2003). Pre-service teachers' attitudes about writing and learning to teach writing: Implications for teacher educators. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(3), 33-50.The questionnaire is found on page 50.
Students are required to complete an essay for the course due Session II. They will be asked to address the same questions as those listed on the attached interview/questionnaire. I will meet with students individually, provided they sign a personal consent form, following Session II to ask for additional clarification that addresses the interview questions and builds upon what was included in the essay. The interviews will need to be open-ended to ensure I can gather pertinent information concerning the students' writing histories.At the end of the course following April 18th, I will interview students again using the same interview questionnaire.
Have everyone complete the survey orally.
Two EXPS 598 students – one teacher values it somewhat for herself and the other values it somewhat for her students
At the end of the study, one student was on maternity leave. The student who somewhat valued the writing process for herself pre changed to highlly value for post. No other changes. One of the teachers was a music teacher and did not feel the writin process was important for her students in the capacity she taught pre and post.
Gallavan and her team found students disagreed 65% of the time or more for all of these but this bolded item. For this item, students were split down the middle 49% and 51%
88 comments highlighted
Ask for 13 reading volunteers
These topics seemed to span the sessions.
Street (2003) studied 5 teachers who were learning to be middle school teachers in urban settings.
I am thinking without positive nonfiction writing experiences, the focus will be on narrative writing that connects the hearts of the reader and writers. Can we make nonfiction writing exciting?
Street (2003) studied 5 teachers who were learning to be middle school teachers in urban settings.
Conclude the presentation here.
ReferencesAtwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Bishop, W. (1999). Places to stand: The reflective writer-teacher-writer in composition. College Composition and Communication, 51(1), 9-31.Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children’s ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Brooks, G. W. (2007). Teachers as readers and writers and as teachers of reading and writing. Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 177-191.Fearn, L, & Farnan, N. (2007). The influence of professional development on young writers’ writing performance. Action Teacher Education, 29(2), 17-28.Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Perspectives in writing research. New York: The Guilford Press.Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Grisham, D. L., Wolsey, T. D. (2011). Writing instruction for teacher candidates: Strengthening a weak curricular area. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50, 348-364.Michaud, R. (1984). Them as can should do. English Journal, 73(2), 38-42.Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (Rev. 2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson/Heinle.National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges, (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. New York, NY: College Board. Retrieved April 29, 2008, from http:/www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdfNational Writing Project, & Nagin, C. (2006). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools (Rev. and updated ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Pardo, L. S. (2006). The role of context in learning to teach writing: What teacher educators need to know to support beginning urban teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 378-394.Robbins, B. W. (1996). Teachers as writers: Tensions between theory and practice. Journal of Teaching Writing, 15(1), 107-128.Street, C., & Stang, K. (2008). Improving the teaching of writing across the curriculum: A model for teaching in-service secondary teachers to write. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1), 37-49.Stockinger, P. C. (2007). Living in, learning from, looking back, breaking through in the English language arts methods course: A case study of two preservice teachers. English Education, 39(3), 201-223.
ReferencesAtwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Bishop, W. (1999). Places to stand: The reflective writer-teacher-writer in composition. College Composition and Communication, 51(1), 9-31.Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children’s ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Brooks, G. W. (2007). Teachers as readers and writers and as teachers of reading and writing. Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 177-191.Fearn, L, & Farnan, N. (2007). The influence of professional development on young writers’ writing performance. Action Teacher Education, 29(2), 17-28.Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Perspectives in writing research. New York: The Guilford Press.Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Grisham, D. L., Wolsey, T. D. (2011). Writing instruction for teacher candidates: Strengthening a weak curricular area. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50, 348-364.Michaud, R. (1984). Them as can should do. English Journal, 73(2), 38-42.Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (Rev. 2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson/Heinle.National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges, (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. New York, NY: College Board. Retrieved April 29, 2008, from http:/www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdfNational Writing Project, & Nagin, C. (2006). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools (Rev. and updated ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Pardo, L. S. (2006). The role of context in learning to teach writing: What teacher educators need to know to support beginning urban teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 378-394.Robbins, B. W. (1996). Teachers as writers: Tensions between theory and practice. Journal of Teaching Writing, 15(1), 107-128.Street, C., & Stang, K. (2008). Improving the teaching of writing across the curriculum: A model for teaching in-service secondary teachers to write. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1), 37-49.Stockinger, P. C. (2007). Living in, learning from, looking back, breaking through in the English language arts methods course: A case study of two preservice teachers. English Education, 39(3), 201-223.
ReferencesAtwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Bishop, W. (1999). Places to stand: The reflective writer-teacher-writer in composition. College Composition and Communication, 51(1), 9-31.Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children’s ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Brooks, G. W. (2007). Teachers as readers and writers and as teachers of reading and writing. Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 177-191.Fearn, L, & Farnan, N. (2007). The influence of professional development on young writers’ writing performance. Action Teacher Education, 29(2), 17-28.Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Perspectives in writing research. New York: The Guilford Press.Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Grisham, D. L., Wolsey, T. D. (2011). Writing instruction for teacher candidates: Strengthening a weak curricular area. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50, 348-364.Michaud, R. (1984). Them as can should do. English Journal, 73(2), 38-42.Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (Rev. 2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson/Heinle.National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges, (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. New York, NY: College Board. Retrieved April 29, 2008, from http:/www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdfNational Writing Project, & Nagin, C. (2006). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools (Rev. and updated ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Pardo, L. S. (2006). The role of context in learning to teach writing: What teacher educators need to know to support beginning urban teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 378-394.Robbins, B. W. (1996). Teachers as writers: Tensions between theory and practice. Journal of Teaching Writing, 15(1), 107-128.Street, C., & Stang, K. (2008). Improving the teaching of writing across the curriculum: A model for teaching in-service secondary teachers to write. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1), 37-49.Stockinger, P. C. (2007). Living in, learning from, looking back, breaking through in the English language arts methods course: A case study of two preservice teachers. English Education, 39(3), 201-223.
ReferencesAtwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Bishop, W. (1999). Places to stand: The reflective writer-teacher-writer in composition. College Composition and Communication, 51(1), 9-31.Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children’s ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Brooks, G. W. (2007). Teachers as readers and writers and as teachers of reading and writing. Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 177-191.Fearn, L, & Farnan, N. (2007). The influence of professional development on young writers’ writing performance. Action Teacher Education, 29(2), 17-28.Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Perspectives in writing research. New York: The Guilford Press.Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Grisham, D. L., Wolsey, T. D. (2011). Writing instruction for teacher candidates: Strengthening a weak curricular area. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50, 348-364.Michaud, R. (1984). Them as can should do. English Journal, 73(2), 38-42.Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (Rev. 2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson/Heinle.National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges, (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. New York, NY: College Board. Retrieved April 29, 2008, from http:/www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdfNational Writing Project, & Nagin, C. (2006). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools (Rev. and updated ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Pardo, L. S. (2006). The role of context in learning to teach writing: What teacher educators need to know to support beginning urban teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 378-394.Robbins, B. W. (1996). Teachers as writers: Tensions between theory and practice. Journal of Teaching Writing, 15(1), 107-128.Street, C., & Stang, K. (2008). Improving the teaching of writing across the curriculum: A model for teaching in-service secondary teachers to write. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1), 37-49.Stockinger, P. C. (2007). Living in, learning from, looking back, breaking through in the English language arts methods course: A case study of two preservice teachers. English Education, 39(3), 201-223.
ReferencesAtwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.Bishop, W. (1999). Places to stand: The reflective writer-teacher-writer in composition. College Composition and Communication, 51(1), 9-31.Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children’s ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Brooks, G. W. (2007). Teachers as readers and writers and as teachers of reading and writing. Journal of Educational Research, 100(3), 177-191.Fearn, L, & Farnan, N. (2007). The influence of professional development on young writers’ writing performance. Action Teacher Education, 29(2), 17-28.Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1984). Perspectives in writing research. New York: The Guilford Press.Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. New York: Alliance for Excellent Education.Graves, D. H. (1983). Writing: Teachers & children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.Grisham, D. L., Wolsey, T. D. (2011). Writing instruction for teacher candidates: Strengthening a weak curricular area. Literacy Research and Instruction, 50, 348-364.Michaud, R. (1984). Them as can should do. English Journal, 73(2), 38-42.Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing (Rev. 2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Thomson/Heinle.National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges, (2003). The neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. New York, NY: College Board. Retrieved April 29, 2008, from http:/www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdfNational Writing Project, & Nagin, C. (2006). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools (Rev. and updated ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.Pardo, L. S. (2006). The role of context in learning to teach writing: What teacher educators need to know to support beginning urban teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(4), 378-394.Robbins, B. W. (1996). Teachers as writers: Tensions between theory and practice. Journal of Teaching Writing, 15(1), 107-128.Street, C., & Stang, K. (2008). Improving the teaching of writing across the curriculum: A model for teaching in-service secondary teachers to write. Action in Teacher Education, 30(1), 37-49.Stockinger, P. C. (2007). Living in, learning from, looking back, breaking through in the English language arts methods course: A case study of two preservice teachers. English Education, 39(3), 201-223.