Writing well is not just an option for young
people-it is a necessity. Along with reading comprehension,
writing skill is a predictor of academic success and a basic
requirement for participation in civic life and in the global
economy.Yet every year in the United States large numbers
of adolescents graduate from high school unable to write
at the basic levels required by colleges or employers.
This report offers a number of specific teaching
techniques that research suggests will help 4th- to 12th-grade
students in our nation's schools.The report focuses on all
students, not just those who display writing difficulties,
although this latter group is deservedly the focus of much
attention.The premise of this report is that all students
need to become proficient and flexible writers.
This report identifies 11 elements of current
writing instruction found to be effective for helping adolescent
students learn to write well and to use writing as a tool
for learning. It is important to note that all of the elements
are supported by rigorous research, but that even when used
together, they do not constitute a full writing curriculum.
1. Writing Strategies, which involves teaching
students strategies for planning, revising, and editing
their compositions
2. Summarization, which involves explicitly and systematically
teaching students how to summarize texts
3. Collaborative Writing, which uses instructional arrangements
in which adolescents work together to plan, draft, revise,
and edit their compositions
4. Specific Product Goals, which assigns students specific,
reachable goals for the writing they are to complete
5. Word Processing, which uses computers and word processors
as instructional supports for writing assignments
6. Sentence Combining, which involves teaching students
to construct more complex, sophisticated sentences
7. Prewriting, which engages students in activities designed
to help them generate or organize ideas for their composition
8. Inquiry Activities, which engages students in analyzing
immediate, concrete data to help them develop ideas and
content for a particular writing task
9. Process Writing Approach, which interweaves a number
of writing instructional activities in a workshop environment
that stresses extended writing opportunities, writing for
authentic audiences, personalized instruction, and cycles
of writing
10. Study of Models, which provides students with opportunities
to read, analyze, and emulate models of good writing
11. Writing for Content Learning, which uses writing as
a tool for learning content material
The authors hope that besides providing research-supported
information about effective writing instruction for classroom
teachers, this report will stimulate discussion and action
at policy and research levels, leading to solid improvements
in writing instruction in grades 4 to 12 nationwide.
Graham, S. and Perin, D. (2006). Writing next:
effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in
middle and high school. Washington, DC: AEE.
Download the full report from: www.all4ed.org/publications/WritingNext/WritingNext.pdf
A systematic review was undertaken to answer the research
question 'What is the evidence for successful practice
in teaching and learning with regard to non-fiction writing
(specifically argumentative writing) for 7-14 year olds?'
using EPPI-Centre methodology.
Results showed that certain conditions are either assumed
or have to be in place to create a climate for successful
practice. These are not specific to argumentative writing,
but include a writing process model in which students
are encouraged to plan, draft, edit and revise their writing;
self-motivation; some degree of cognitive reasoning training,
in addition to the natural cognitive development that
takes place with maturation; peer collaboration, thus
modelling a dialogue that will become internal and constitute
'thought'; and explicit and very clear explanations for
students of the processes to be learned.
The specific strategies have been identified that have
contributed to successful practice in teaching and learning
with regard to argumentative writing for 7-14 year olds
include 'heuristics', that is, scaffolding of structures
and devices that aid the composition of argumentative
writing - in particular, planning, which can include examining
a question, brainstorming, organising and sequencing ideas,
and evaluating.
Andrews, R., Torgerson, C., Low, G., McGuinn, N. and
Robinson, A. (2006). Teaching and learning argumentative
non-fiction writing for 7-14 year olds: A systematic review
of the evidence of successful practice. London: EPPI-Centre,
Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education,
University of London.
Download the full report from: eppi.ioe.ac.uk
Writing Matters examines the difficulties
that many students encounter in their written work at university
and its authors propose a range of measures to address these.
The report argues that much greater attention should be
paid to helping students adjust to the demands of writing
at university and that writing development is a key factor
for driving up standards in the HE sector.
Chapters in this report:
The authors argue for urgent sector-wide action
as well as greater emphasis to be given in schools on essay
writing and written communication skills.
Davies, S., Swinburne, D. & Williams,
G. (2006). Writing Matters. London: The Royal Literary Fund.
Download the full report: www.rlf.org.uk/fellowshipscheme/documents/RLFwritingmatters_000.pdf
During the first year of implementation, the
emphasis of the America's Choice school reform design is
an intensive focus on building students' writing skills.
Writers workshop, the primary instructional emphasis of
America's Choice during this year, is the component of the
design for which teachers first receive in-depth training.
In keeping with the emphasis of America's Choice, this year-one
external evaluation study of the impact of America's Choice
on student performance in Georgia focuses on student writing
performance. The study examines changes in student writing
performance from 2001 to 2002, the initial year of America's
Choice in 109 Georgia elementary schools and 50 Georgia
middle schools. Because state writing assessments were administered
to students in fifth and eighth grades, our analyses are
restricted to these grade levels.
Overall, the researchers found that students in America's
Choice schools performed better on the state writing test
than did students from similar Georgia schools. We found
significantly greater gains in the writing performance of
America's Choice schools, after adjusting for differences
in prior school performance and a variety of school-level
demographic characteristics. These effects were apparent
in both the fifth- and eighth-grade results. More specifically,
the average Choice elementary school had 20% more of its
fifth grade students scoring at the two highest levels of
writing in 2001 than in 2002. Similar Georgia's Choice schools
had a significantly lower increase of 17%. For eighth grade,
the average Georgia's Choice middle school had 29% more
of its eighth-grade students scoring on target or better
writing in 2001 than in 2002. Similar Georgia's Choice schools
had a significantly lower increase of 25%. This suggests
that there was a sizable improvement in writing improvements
statewide in Georgia, the improvements for Georgia's Choice
schools were even larger than the trends for similar schools
throughout the state.
This study also contains exploratory results of the relationships
between America's Choice school-level implementation measures
and student learning. These measures are designed to assess
schools' implementation on a variety of dimensions including
understanding of the design, school and classroom implementation
components, data use, parental involvement and leadership.
The researchers found that none of these implementation
indicators were reliable predictors of student achievement
(taken from the executive summary).
May, H. (2004). The impact of America's Choice
on writing performance in Georgia: First-year results. University
of Pennsylvania: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
This NRDC report reviews the literature with
regards to the following three areas: (1) a narrative review
explores the ways in which studies, that conceptualise writing
and writing development, contribute to an understanding
of how adult learners develop as writers; (2) a systematic
review addresses the questions of what factors in adult
literacy programmes enable learners to develop effective
writing skills; and (3) a review covering current practice.
The literature review indicates that writing should be viewed
as a process in which the writer interacts with what s/he
has written. The reviews highlighted several variables that
may be significant in the teaching and/or learning or writing,
which include the authenticity of materials and communication,
collaborative approaches to writing, making the process
of writing explicit to learners, and contextualising writing
tasks and making teaching and material relevant to learners'
lives. Overall, this report concludes that there is little
sound empirical evidence on the factors in adult literacy
programmes that are positively related to learners' effective
writing skills and calls for research that helps identify
variables that impact on adult learners' writing development.
Kelly, S., Soundranayagam, L. & Grief,
S. (2004). Teaching and learning writing: A review of research
and practice. London: NRDC.
Download the full report: www.nrdc.org.uk
This review by the English Review Group of
the EPPI-Centre aimed to 1) map the field of research on
the effects of text- and sentence- level grammar teaching
on writing in English-speaking countries for pupils aged
5 and 16; and 2) to undertake a distinct but complementary
in-depth review in the field of sentence-level grammar:
the effect of teaching syntax on accuracy and quality in
written composition. It reports that there is no evidence
to counter the prevailing belief that the teaching of the
principles underlying and informing word order or syntax
has virtually no influence on the writing quality or accuracy
of 5 to 16-year-olds. In terms of practice, the main implication
of the review's findings are that there is no evidence that
the teaching of grammar, whether traditional or generative/transformational,
is worth the time if the aim is the improvement of the quality
and/or accuracy of written composition. However, teaching
of such grammar might be of value in itself, in that it
might lead to enhanced knowledge and awareness of how language
works. It calls for a large-scale, well-designed randomised
controlled trial to answer conclusively the questions about
whether syntax reaching does improve the written quality
and accuracy of 5 to 16-year-olds.
EPPI-Centre (2004). The effect of grammar
teaching (syntax) in English on 5 to 16 year olds' accuracy
and quality in written composition. London: EPPI-Centre,
Institute of Education, University of London.
Download the report from eppi.ioe.ac.uk
This research project carried out by the Cambridge
County Council reports on a small scale study that was conducted
in 9 primary/junior schools with lower than average gaps
between reading and writing scores in KS2 National Curriculum
Tests. Each of these schools was visited by an adviser and/or
consultant. Strategies were discussed, practice observed,
children were interviewed and case studies were compiled.
These findings were collated to support schools where boys'
writing was at a significantly lower level than boys' reading.
In addition to offering practical suggestions for targeting
boys' writing, the report also includes summaries of research
projects that were carried out by six teachers in the above
schools.
Cambridge County Council (2002). Developing
boys' writing:. Huntingdon: Cambridge County Council.
The report is available to buy from www.ccceducation.net.
This study investigated the relationships
between (1) linguistic characteristics of children's writing,
(2) the score awarded to the writing, and (3) other background
variables such as gender of writer. It explored these relationships
using qualitative and quantitative examination of over 200
stories written by 11-year-old children, which were drawn
from an archive of scripts produced under assessments in
England. Grammatical analysis of scripts included identification
of sentence types; whole-text analysis examined variables
such as narrative choice, gender of story characters, and
interaction between characters. The analyses suggested some
differences between textual approaches adopted by gender
and score-related sub-groups, including (a) thematic choice,
(2) use of dialogue and relationship with reader, and (c)
narrative persona. Overall, the study identified some evidence
to suggest that there were some differences in narrative
approach between ability and gender-sub-groups. However,
the number of scripts in some sub-groups were insufficient
to allow for the full range of quantitative analysis.
Brill, F. & Sewell, J. (2002). Investigating
relationships between linguistic features of children's
writing and marks attained. Slough: NFER.
For more information about the project see www.nfer.ac.uk
This study investigated the handwriting characteristics
of 1,192 students across the 11-16 age range in a large
comprehensive school. This study found that:
- Handwriting speed was a factor in student achievement,
regardless of ability.
- Students achieving higher-than-expected GCSE English
language grades tended to write at a higher speed than
those who underachieved (expectation and achievement
being related to Year 7 CATS ability tests).
- At all ability levels students who achieved higher-than-expected
GCSE English grades had a better handwriting style than
those who underachieved. Although this study does not
offer evidence of cause and effect, the evidence suggested
that handwriting quality and quantity are strongly associated
with examination achievement at all but the very highest
levels of ability.
- Slow handwriters had problems with poor motor co-ordination,
spelling, letter formation, word shapes and discrimination
between upper and lower case.
- Over 40% of students in Year 7, reducing only to
20% in Year 11, were writing slowly. Of these, some
had great difficulty making what they wrote legible.
- Boys in Year 7 wrote more slowly than girls but increased
their speed each year. By Year 11 they were slightly
faster than girls. Girls' writing speed increased from
Year 7 to Year 8, then stayed constant.
- There was a correlation between speed and Reading/Spelling
age in Year 7 for boys and girls. An increase in speed
of 3 - 4 wpm corresponded on average to an increase
in Reading/Spelling age of 3 - 4 months.
- Boys had a higher frequency of handwriting problems
than girls. Failure to join up letters was the problem
with the greatest incidence in boys and girls, overall
at a higher level in girls. There was no clear link
between the frequency of letter-joining as a characteristic
and handwriting speed. Hence 'printing' does not necessarily
limit handwriting speed.
- The effect of joins is different for boys than for
girls. For boys, failure to join up correctly is associated
with an average drop of half a grade in GCSE English.
For girls it is associated with an average drop of a
whole grade.
Barnett, D. Galbraith, J., Roaf, C. &
Rutherford, S. (1999). The role of handwriting in raising
achievement. Thame, Oxon:Ford Wiliams School.
Download this research report (pdf) from: www.tta.gov.uk
80px.gif)
