Group items tagged

This study of second and fourth grade students examines student attitudes toward writing. The study suggests that the culture of high-stake testing has placed teachers in a bind that forces them to teach writing aggressively, which takes the fun out writing. The younger the students are, the authors claim, the more positive their attitude toward writing is. The older they are, the more likely they are to come face to face with these higher stake environments and the more negative their attitudes will become.The study actually has fourth grade students meet with and tutor the second grade students in writing in order to measure the positive or negative affect of tutoring on writing attitudes. I was especially drawn to the passage that said, "Some self-efficacy researchers have suggested that teachers should pay as much attention to students' perceptions of competence as to actual competence, for the perceptions may more accurately predict students' motivation and future academic choices." (182).

The author inquires about why students dislike writing. Bricker presents a case in her inquiry that addresses the student's problem through one on one discussion. Her case lifted the student's aversion to writing by showing him directly that he was able to write without realizing it. This article really brings to light the importance of identifying negative attitudes towards writing and paying close attention to the student's psychological reaction to writing. In doing so, teachers can adjust the dialogue to get a more eager response to write from students having difficulties with writing. One significant idea presented in this inquiry is allowing students to write what they want to say rather than what the teacher wants to hear. This gives teachers and future teachers a big clue as to what possible circumstances prevent students from writing and ones that encourage them to write.

Luberda's essay is a preliminary overview of his experiment in applying cognitive science to writing. Luberda suggests that the most applicable elements of cognitive science for teaching writing and composition come from linguistics. He also suggests that in teaching writing and literature, students may be accustomed to learning terms, dates, facts, and test-taking, while others receive a vague understanding of literature. In light of the teaching structures he used, the writing and analytical skills the students acquired were independent of the literature in their course. In using the cognitive approach, Luberda structured writing and literature courses within the context of differentiating relations between language change and writing acquisition. In reading the positive results of Luberda's experiment, I noticed a few implications for teaching writing. One advantage of applying linguisitics and the cognitive approach is that students learn why they write the way they do and raises awareness to the writing structures they use. The other advantage is the ability for students to "say what I mean" and incorporate accuracy in their writing when communicating meaning. This would mean that even when students are intentionally manipulating writing structures within various genres, they are learning to communicate "what I mean" without being submissive to directness. There was one negative result of the experiment where a student stated "I don't believe this course has helped me improve my writing skills. In high school I was taught how to write analyze books and then write papers about them using solid grammar, intense vocab, thesis statement and a well thought out conclusion. I do not believe I learned how to improve my papers. I am still on the same level of writing as I was in high school." I find this to be interesting in relation to teaching writing because it suggests that cognitively, we strive to use writing structures differently or advance our writing by chan

Becker's article discusses the various models researchers have used to blueprint the cognitive process writers use during revision. The discussion associated with these models came from Becker's inquiry on why novice writers have negative attitudes towards the revision process in comparison to more experienced writers. The goal of this research was to make explicit the most effective and efficient cognitive strategies teachers could use to help novice writers improve their revision process. Most of the models consist of evaluation skills and long-term memory associations. I find this article useful for teaching writing in the sense that it has potential apparatuses that teachers can use to motivate students to revise their work. Because revision is an important and sometimes complex part of the writing process, these models may serve useful or may serve as templates for other models to arise when applied to teaching. The important thing here is finding ways to encourage students to revise their work and examine what processes students use to motivate them to revise rather than have students assume their work is already perfect.

The Cognitive Revolution article takes into account the various psychological theories applied in the field towards language. One particular theory called into question by Miller is behaviorism. Having been a Behaviorist himself, Miller examines his previous biases about language in relation to Chomsky's theories of grammar. Miller finds that in adopting Chomsky's view of grammar, we bring the mind and cognitive process back into our understanding of language. In relation to grammar, Miller states "The grammatical rules that govern phrases and sentences are not behavior. They are mentalistic hypotheses about the cognitive processes responsible for the verbal behaviors we observe." This article is really helpful in providing teachers information about where some of our language theories come from and how they have shifted in practice after behaviorism. I think the most important point here is to not make the same mistakes with behaviorism as done in the past. The assumptions of behaviorism applied in the teaching can have some devastating consequences in student writing. Since teachers have the potential to exploit the cognitive processes using stimulus and response, it's possible that teachers may or may not be aware of the consequences if they happen to instill negative writing habits and attitudes in students using the assumptions implied in behaviorist theory. Having the definition of grammar rules Miller states, it provides teachers a working definition and inquiry to better understand how we form grammar rules, and what strategies students are using to apply grammar and form rules of their own.

I found this video actually looking for an informative video about students liking writing ---- goes to show that most students "hate" writing for multiple reasons. Many of the reasons in the control of educators. Teachers have the power to change the negative connotation students interpret writing to be - just an assignment, no further significance to, no interest to write ---- students should enjoy writing <<< school stems from learning through writing and reading ---- students want to write on things that interest them not pedagogical theories and research assignments. Students like to learn through their own eyes - students enjoy different genres of writing. Teachers have the power to enable their students in finding their interest in the writing realm. However, students should know the general rules and process of writing whether it be a narrative or research assignment, etc. Also, (as a teacher comments within the movie) - students don't always take blogs or social-media oriented writing forums with interest since self-representation is then transmitted into a educational institution. The video also covers the public's views on possible preventing of "writing hatred." This video also reflects the concept in the Casanava article in our class packet - teachers need to work on getting students immersed in writing through allowing their personal knowledge be combined with the values and lessons deemed by the institution they are writing for.

In "Exploring the Impact of a High-Stakes Direct Writing Assessment in Two High School Classrooms," Ketter and Pool (2001) use a case study to examine the effects of standardized direct writing assessments on instruction and on student affect. They used surveys, interviews, student work, case notes, and curriculum plans to closely examine how teachers and students in two Maryland high school classrooms were impacted by the state's high-stakes writing assessment. The two classes were designed for students who had previously failed the Maryland Writing Test, with the specific intention of helping those students to pass the direct writing test, which is required for high school graduation. Over half of the students in the two classes were identified as members of families of low socio-economic status. Ketter & Pool found that the primary factor negatively influencing instructional methodologies and student and teacher affect is the failure of instruction and assessment to address "how differences in discourse styles embedded in communities have a powerful effect on how children see their world and communicate about it with others" (369). In this way, students from non-mainstream culture are marginalized by the school system. Ketter & Pool recommend that school and community stakeholders work together to devise teaching and assessment practices that "take into consideration the rich variety of American culture and the complexity of literacy instruction that result[s] in a student's ability to make meaning" (386).

The link I've included is to the stable URL, which only displays the first page. Sorry -- you will have to log in to JSTOR to read the entire article.

In this article by Ken Hyland, he examines how the role of the writer and "writer intrusion" affect the impression given by a body of writing, and particularly how terms like "writer intrusion" reflect an unnecessarily negative view on the personal involvement of the writer with the subject. While he acknowledges that different contexts require different levels of formality and passive voice, new writers benefit from learning how their role shapes the meaning of their work, and how to take a particular identity as the author. He focuses here specifically on the use of the first person in academic writing and what options are available for its use across many fields; however, this is only the tip of the iceberg, he says, in the formation of an authorial identity in an academic setting.

Byung-In Seo explains why she teaches the rigid five-paragraph essay to her remedial students. She argues that doing so gives the students a formula to follow. This is important because the majority of her have trouble organizing their thoughts when they try to speak with her, let alone trying to write in an organized manner. She states that once the students grasp the basic five-sentence, five-paragraph essay, she allows them to extend beyond that as they become more fluent in essay writing. I found this article interesting because after tutoring in a high school where the five-sentence, five-paragraph essay was the ONLY format allowed, I began to have a negative opinion of such rigidity. However, Seo's philosophy is one I can agree with and one in which I can see working to bring the remedial students to a higher level of writing. I also think that following Seo's lead will also help those students develop critical thinking skills that will benefit them in their everyday lives.