CHAPTER ONE - Saint Xavier University



Writing Reformation

Using guided practice in high school classrooms to enhance student writing ability

By: Derrick Smith

Saint Xavier University

EDUG-513

CHAPTER ONE

PROBLEM INTRODUCTION

Introduction and Rationale

The implementation of the No Child Left Behind legislation has had a significant impact on the United States educational system. The legislation has placed an added emphasis on standardized testing for students. Consequently, schools are altering curriculums to improve performance on standardized tests. While students are spending extra time in federally mandated areas like mathematics and reading, the development of student’s writing is no longer a priority in schools. Schools are allotting extra time for math and reading development, at the expense of writing instruction. A 2002 study by the National Association for Education Progress found that only 49 percent of high school students are getting writing assignments of three pages or more in English classes (NAEP Writing Statistics, 2002). Also, students who do receive three page writing assignments only receive those assignments once or twice per month. Standardized testing of writing is a costly and time consuming venture, so writing is often excluded in large scale standardized assessments. The ability to effectively communicate on paper is an essential skill to develop in the educational career of any student. Writing is a necessary element in the jobs of many. Also, jobs are beginning to require specialized elements of writing and their growth have been projected to grow at a rate faster than employment (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2002). However, research shows that few students are graduating high school with strong writing skills. The 2002 NAEP study uncovered that an alarming number of high school students graduate with poor writing skills. The NAEP study found that only 28 percent of high school seniors are writing at a proficient level (NAEP Writing Statistics, 2002). Students are displaying low writing achievement despite the fact that students take more courses in English than in any other subject area (NAEP Transcript, 2000). The surprisingly low number shows that writing is not only a problem for students in schools with insufficient resources. Students in the wealthiest schools from the wealthiest communities also need to improve their writing skills. More than 97 percent of high school students state that they are looking to pursue some form of education after high school (National Education, 2001). Many students from these schools are even exposed to college preparatory writing programs that are supposed to prepare them for writing at the collegiate level. However, these programs are not producing proficient writers. Other studies reveal that college professors and employers are noticing the deterioration in students’ writing. A 2002 Public Agenda survey found that 70 percent of employers who hire students out of high school and freshman college writing professors consider the writing skills of high school graduates as “fair” or “poor” (Reality Check, 2002).

As a future English teacher I feel it should be my duty to develop my students’ writing skills.

Local Context

Student Population

The high school is a large two leveled building in Chicago’s southwest suburbs with 3441 students. The student population is 91 percent white, 2 percent African-American, 4 percent Hispanic, 4 percent Asian Pacific Islander, and less than 1 percent Native American. The school is well attended with a 94 percent attendance rate and no chronic truancy rate. Three percent of students come from low income families. The average class size of the school is 19.4 and the parental contact rate is 68 percent. The school scores slightly above the state average in all areas of the ACT examination, with an average 22 composite score. The school graduates 88 percent of its students, while there is a 1 percent drop out rate (Illinois School Report Card, 2003).

Program

The school’s English classes are all ability tracked at three different levels. Basic classes are for lower level students who are not performing at the requirements of their grade level. The basic classes are divided by grade level. For example sophomores who are not performing well in English could be enrolled in Sophomore Basic English. The honors classes are arranged similarly to the basic classes except the classes are for students who are performing above expectations. The rest of the English department is organized into a number of academic classes. These classes are designed for the majority of students at the school. Students are able to choose which class they would most like to enroll in. Course offerings include “Writing Fiction and Poetry”, “College Prep Writing”, and “Shakespeare”. These are just a few of the academic courses offered by the English department. The development of writing is stressed in all classes, but especially in the upper level academic tracked classes, and in all of the honors classes. Students in honors classes have often been in the same class with the same people for four years.

Faculty Profile

The faculty at the school is 98 percent white, and less than 1 percent of teachers are African-American or Hispanic. The average teacher salary is $74,600 and all teachers in the school are considered “highly qualified.” Teachers at the school have an average of 17 years teaching experience. Fifty nine percent of the schools teacher’s have obtained their masters degree or above and 38 percent have their bachelors degree. The school gets 77 percent of its revenue from local property taxes. Forty five percent of the teachers in the school are male, while 55 percent of teachers are female (Illinois School Report Card, 2003).

Facility

The facility is a large two leveled building that first opened in 1954 but has grown into an impressive modern high school thanks to a recent large scale renovation and addition. The renovation was needed to accommodate for the growing student population. While the renovation has made the school less crowded, it is still fairly congested. Students are allowed seven minutes to pass between classes because of the slow moving hallways. The school has four gyms, a state of the art performing arts center, a television station, and a radio station. A large library and several computer labs available for student use are also in the school. The school has a number of athletic facilities, a workout center, and weight room. The school’s large cafeteria offers students a number of menu options and modern seating. The school also possesses a number of offices to help manage the school. The main office, dean’s office, guidance office, attendance office, and athletic office are all allotted separate space in the building. There are two different types of classrooms at the school. The classrooms from the initial building are traditional in size and style with blackboards and half desks. The classrooms within the building’s addition are larger and equipped with dry erase boards. Students sit in large table style desks. Also, each classroom in the new portion of the building is connected to a larger “community classroom” which is large enough for two classes to receive dual instructions from teachers.

Problem Statement

College bound high school seniors are not graduating high school with the writing skills necessary to immediately excel in writing at the college level. National writing assessments and teacher produced writing surveys display the deficiencies in high school students’ writing.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Comprehensive research was conducted in the area of writing and writing development for the review of literature. Since writing is such a subjective process it is some times difficult to find conclusive primary studies and well conducted study data in the area. However, there is significant data on the current state of student writing in America, and also some valuable studies providing insight into effective teaching strategies to enhance student writing. The review of literature addresses students’ current writing ability, time spent writing in the classroom, writing curriculum, teaching the writing process, and students’ opinion of writing.

Students’ Writing Ability

While testimony from teachers, college professors, and business professionals provide first hand accounts of the shortcomings in students’ writing, educational research data further illustrates writing deficiencies among students. The 2002 study by the National Association for Educational Progress provides hard evidence that students’ writing needs to be improved. The studied measured the writing abilities of 12,000 twelfth grade students in three writing areas. Three different areas were surveyed since the association believes that students should be able to write in a number of areas. The first area measured was narrative writing. Narrative writing involved students composing personal stories or essays. Students were encouraged to use their creativity and powers of observation to develop stories that can capture a reader's imagination (NAEP Writing, 2002). The informative writing section asked students to “communicate information to the reader to share knowledge or to convey messages, instructions, and ideas” (NAEP Writing, 2002). The informative topics in the 2002 writing assessment required students to write on specified subjects in a variety of formats, such as reports, reviews, and letters” (NAEP, Writing, 2002). The final section evaluated was persuasive writing. NAEP defined persuasive writing as a work that “seeks to influence the reader to take some action or bring about change. It may contain factual information, such as reasons, examples, or comparisons; however, its main purpose is not to inform, but to persuade” (NAEP Writing, 2002).

The students were prompted to write in a variety of different styles in the study. For example, students may have been asked to write a letter to the editor of a newspaper or to write a story based on a poem. Students were also encouraged to develop a writing process in the assessment. Students were given a brochure that focused on planning and reviewing writing. The brochure offered advice to students on how to get their writing started and how to revise. Additional space for planning and revising was provided for in the testing booklet. NAEP also asked students complete a four page questionnaire about their independent and classroom writing experiences before completing the assessment. The twelfth grade students were given a 50 minute time period to complete two writing tasks. However, some twelfth grade students were given a 50 minute time period to complete one writing task; the extra time was allotted for prewriting and revising. Essays were scored on a six point scale and then the total scores were scaled to develop an overall writing competency for the student. The scaled scores are assigned to one of three writing levels, basic, proficient or advanced. A basic score demonstrates “partial mastery of prerequisite knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work at each grade” (Writing Framework 1998, p. 55). Proficient denotes “solid academic performance for each grade assessed. Students reaching this level have demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter, including subject-matter knowledge, application of such knowledge to real world situations, and analytical skills appropriate to the subject matter” (Writing Framework, 1998, p. 55). Finally, advanced represents a superior performance by the student (Writing Framework, 1998, p. 56).

The findings of the study show that an alarmingly small number of 12th grade students are considered proficient or advanced in their writing. Only 22 percent of students score at the proficient level, meaning that a student is capable of composing organized, coherent prose in clear language with correct spelling and grammar (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2004). Also, only 2 percent of students scored at the advanced level. Seventy-seven percent of high school seniors surveyed score at or below the basic level.

The scores show that students are demonstrating some writing ability, but they are not able to effectively communicate on paper at a high level. Fifty-one percent of students in the study scored at the basic level. In fact, the number of students at the basic level fell from 57 to 51 percent between 1998 and 2002, while the number of students at the below basic level rose from 22 to 26 percent. The research shows that students are able to writing effectively at a minimal level. However, graduating high school seniors do not have the writing skills necessary to succeed in college or in the working world.

Time Spent Writing in the Classroom

Writing has been pushed to the backburner of education in classrooms. It is not surprising that student writing is lacking because writing has not been emphasized in the classroom (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2004). In light of the added emphasis placed on standardized testing, reading and math instruction have become top priorities in schools. Also, students often only receive writing practice and instruction in their English class. Despite urges to implement “writing across the curriculum” programs in schools, students are still only receiving writing instruction and practice in English and Language Arts classes. In April 2003 the National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges issued a lengthy 40-page report illustrating the shortcomings in student’s writing, while also offering a plan for changing writing instruction in America’s schools. The commission, comprised of superintendents, teachers, and university leaders, recommended that “that state and local education agencies work with writing specialists to develop strategies for increasing the amount of time students spend writing” (Neglected “R”, 2003, p. 21). The commission made its suggestion based on data from the 2002 NAEP study that found, “only half of high school seniors (49 percent) receive writing assignments of three pages or more for English class, and then only once or twice a month” (Neglected “R”, 2003, p. 21). The commission called for the time students spend writing to be doubled through increased instruction during school hours and increasing assignments and time spent writing outside of school. The report states, “the research is crystal clear: Schools that do well insist that their students write everyday and teachers provide regular and friendly feedback with the support of parents” (Neglected “R”, 2003, p. 21).

“We're trying to be a voice that says writing is important,” former senator Bob Kerrey, who is now president of New School University in New York City, told the American Association of School Board in an interview from his office in September 2003. The teaching of writing, he believes, requires small classes, talented teachers -- and time. Experts agree on how to improve writing, he said. “We just have to insist that both the time be given to it and the money allocated to it” (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2004).

Teachers need to spend sufficient time on writing in the classroom to allow writing to be modeled. Students should be allowed to see how teachers construct their own writing (Lock, 2004, p. 310). Teachers may feel that they don’t have enough time to model writing assignments for their students. However, teacher modeling is an important aspect of writing instruction. Students should be taught how a writer is able to plan a draft, formulate ideas, revise drafts, and write to a specific audience (Lock, 2004, p. 311).

Research also shows that repeated practice of writing improves writing skills through cognitive development. Anderson (1982) conducted research in the cognitive processes that can help students acquire writing skills. Anderson states that students are able to use cognitive skills after they have received instruction about the skill, and are allowed to practice the skill. The repeated practice of a skill creates a process called “knowledge compilation” that allows the student to the knowledge the skill and apply it into successful application. The skills examined by Anderson and other educational psychologists were put into application in a 2001 study. The study conducted by Johnstone, Ashbaugh, and Warlfield (2001) developed an intensive writing curriculum for college aged students that stressed repeated practice and time spent on writing instruction over a four semester period. The results of the study found significant improvements in the writing ability of students at the conclusion of the program. The research conducted by Anderson and others reflects that students must receive ample writing instruction and practice in order to develop strong writing skills.

Writing Curriculum

Writing curriculums in schools are perhaps the single most influential factor in developing students’ writing. How teachers conduct writing instruction and frame assignments in their classroom affects how their students learn to write. Traditionally, students have been instructed on the finer points of writing before advancing to organizational and ideological skills of composition. Students are traditionally instructed in the components of writing such as sentence construction, paragraph formation, grammar, and even requirements or aspects or certain types of writing. “Rationale for this approach to writing instruction has been that students will become less frustrated if they first learn the building blocks of writing and then later use them when asked to compose more complex pieces of writing.” (Bruch & Reynolds, 2002, p. 12).

A recent 2002 study conducted by Reynolds and Brunch turned the tables on traditional developmental writing curriculum. The study was conducted in freshman writing programs for students who were deemed “at-risk.” Since these students were deemed “at-risk” their writing ability could be deemed as comparable to junior or seniors in high school. Reynolds and Brunch framed their study within the context of “literacy work.” The pair believed that writing is social and that students learning to write are affected and constrained by what they believe good writing to be while communicating on paper. Literacy Work names the process and the outcome of students’ writing ability being affected by the influences of society’s own definition of good writing. While working under this framework, Reynolds and Brunch developed a writing curriculum in composition classes that forced students to participate consciously and reflectively in their writing. The curriculum developed asked students to “write full length essays as well as to study the place of writing in creating academic and other kinds of knowledge” (Reynolds & Brunch, 2001, 13). The writing in these courses were to related to the importance of literacy and writing in society. Students were forced to think about what function writing serves and how it relates to their own writing. The aim of the curriculum was to help students develop their own writing skills, while also teaching students how to relate writing to a number of different fields. Students were put into small classes of 17 students. Teachers in these classes were encouraged to foster class discussion on their own writing beliefs and practices. Student writing in the class was divided into “public writing” and “reflective writing.” The public writing assignments were traditional essay assignments, while reflective writing where students responding and reflecting to their own writing process.

After the classes concluded the students were given a survey and then offered the opportunity to respond and reflect on their experience in the class. The survey first asked students what they believed writing courses should emphasize. Then students were asked what their writing courses do emphasize. Forty six percent of student responses wanted “academic writing skills” to be the focus of their writing courses, 31 percent wanted critical thinking, and 23 percent wanted writing process and problem solving to be emphasized (Reynolds & Brunch, 2001, 16). When students were asked that they believed the writing courses in the study emphasized, Reynolds and Brunch (2002) found that students responded 37 percent for critical thinking, 25 percent academic writing skills, 36 percent writing process and problem solving Reynolds & Brunch, 2001, 16). Reynolds and Brunch state that the 2002 survey findings show that students want a wide variety of instruction and practice in their writing classes.

Reynolds and Brunch also provide student testimony in their study. Testimony from students indicated that the multidisciplinary approach the writing in these courses that stressed student reflection on their own writing and writing’s relation to other disciplines helped students gain a greater appreciation for their own writing. Students stated that through understanding and examining different types of writing they were able to become more aware of writing in a number of areas.

Overall, Reynolds and Brunch initiated a unique developmental writing program in their study. The program created an environment where students were able to redefine their own definitions of writing and reflect on their own writing. Through this program students were able to enhance their writing ability.

Writing Instruction and Process

One of the major obstacles student need to often overcome is a fear of writing. Many times the fear students feel while writing is because of their own feelings of inadequacy. Instructing students in the writing process and allowing for revision is one way teachers are helping students overcome their fears of writing.

“The most important thing is to get students to write without fear -- to understand that everyone struggles," says an English and creative writing teacher at Deerfield High School, outside Chicago. “With informal writing, you can track how students are thinking, and by breaking the assignments down into manageable tasks, [you can make them] less forbidding." Such techniques allow students to write spontaneously, ask questions, and draw connections from their own lives. Moreover, in a comfortable classroom setting, students are more willing to share their ideas and respond to one another's work.” (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2004). Creating writing activities like these allow for students and teachers to continually assess student writing.

Teaching the writing process and allowing for revision also allows students to gain more experience in writing. “Writing experts are unanimous that good writing, like high performance on a musical instrument, involves practice, practice, and more practice” (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2004). While revision helps students gain more practice, students do not always have an accurate concept of what revision entails. “Students believe (revision) means "incorporating the teacher's corrections and handing in the paper for a new grade," Dartmouth writing Professor Phyliss Katz told the American School Board Journal in March. “But when students revise, they should ask themselves: "What is my major argument? Have I developed it coherently and supported it with sufficient evidence?”

Does my paper sustain its focus?" Revision, Katz says, is an issue that secondary school teachers must confront” (Hurwitz & Hurwitz, 2004).

Students’ Feelings About Writing

Teachers and administrators need to examine their own writing practices in the classroom, but it is also valuable to consider the perspective of students (Enders, 2001). The perspective of students can tell teachers what classroom activities and techniques the students felt were beneficial to them. A 2001 study surveyed first year college students to find out what aspects of their high school writing curriculum were beneficial. The survey was conducted in first semester English courses. The survey was given to 315 students over an eight year period. The survey contained six questions:

1. Is the type of writing you are doing in college English different from that done in high school? If yes, explain the difference. If no, give an example of similar activities.

2. How many papers of any type did you write in high school English?

3. Is your writing evaluated differently in college than it was in high school? If yes, explain the difference. If no, describe the criteria used by each institution.

4. What high school activities helped prepare you to write papers in college?

5. Now that you are in college, is there anything about writing that you wish they would have taught you in high school?

6. What is the name of your high school? (Enders, 2001, p 63)

Over 90 percent of the students surveyed were in their first semester of college. Most of the students surveyed came from a white middle class background. Thirteen percent of students surveyed were African-American. The study focused on question 4 of the survey to see what students found useful--or not--in their high school preparation (Enders, 2001). The study found that student responses fell into four main areas. Writing practice, types of assignments, evaluation, and editing and revision were the four main areas cited by students. The rest of the responses stated a sentiment that no activities in their high school writing curriculum helped their development.

More than 33 percent of students cited writing practice as an activity that helped develop their writing. One student stated, “What prepared me most was simply the practice in high school. The ability to play around with writing to see what is my own particular style” (Enders, 2001, p. 63). Students who were given more time to practice and put into situations where writing was required found an improvement in writing. Students who practiced writing in extracurricular activities such as the school newspaper or student council stated that the extra practice helped their writing. The study stated following interpretation, “responses point out what we all know: there is no better way to learn how to write than to write as frequently as possible. Teachers and students can talk about writing until they are blue in the face, but ultimately students simply need frequent opportunities to practice their writing.” (Enders, 2001, p. 64)

The students also stated that the types of writing assignments they received in high school had an impact. The surveys revealed that the assignments students received in high school were not challenging enough. Many of the assignments required simple summarization or recitation of facts. Also, students stated that teachers told them what to write and how to write it, instead of being allowed to develop their own writing style. The researcher in the study argues that students need to be challenged to think more critically. One student stated, “College writing is a lot harder because we have to pick our own topics and develop a paper out of it without the teacher telling us what to write or what not to write. In high school, the teacher always told us what to write and how to write it” (Enders, 2001, p. 64). Several students said that being challenged to think more critically in their essays made them enjoy writing more because they were able to voice an argument of their own and not one that the teacher was telling them.

Teacher evaluation techniques also impacted students’ writing according to the survey. Students desired clearer and more detailed feedback from teachers. Some students said that their writing in high school was only corrected with red pen over grammar problems. Also, students complained that even when they did receive and A or B on an assignment there was no explanation telling the student why they received that grade. Students testified in the survey that they would like to have received more instruction on how to evaluate their own writing, and also would like to have been allowed to participate in peer evaluations. So while teachers may take extensive amounts of time to give feedback on papers, unless that feedback is clear, detailed, and valuable to the students it will not help develop students’ writing.

Editing and revising composed the final area addressed in the student surveys. Editing was defined in the study as, “the practice of addressing problems of wordiness, unclear language, and errors in grammar, punctuation, and spelling within a text” (Enders, 2001, p. 65). On the other hand, revision was defined as, “the process of rethinking, clarifying, developing, and reorganizing an author's ideas and purpose” (Enders, 2001, p. 65). Students stated that they had more experience with editing rather than revising. Students stated that they did have some experience with learning grammar and punctuation, but students were exposed to the material in exercises separate from their writing. Students also had little experience in eliminating wordiness in their papers. Students stated that learning how to eliminate wordiness in high would have helped them make their writing more clear. Students were given little opportunity to revise their papers in high school. This shows how the writing process was not taught to these students.

Twenty five percent of students said that nothing in their high school writing curriculum was beneficial to their writing development. While the researched acknowledges that this survey was given to students during the stress of finals week, the sentiment of such a large amount of students is still significant. Ninety percent of students who stated high school did not help their writing revealed that they wrote 20 or fewer papers in four years of high school. Sixty percent of students reported writing 10 papers or fewer.

After examining the results of the student surveys, the study suggested six areas for improving high school writing curriculums:

• Provide abundant writing practice

• Give writing assignments that ask students to go beyond reporting and summarizing to analyze, develop, and interpret their own ideas as well as those of others

• Give writing assignments that allow students to develop their own topics

• Provide clear grading standards/criteria and thorough feedback

• Allow students to practice evaluating writing, especially in peer-group situations

• Give students opportunities to edit and revise their writing (and teach the distinction between those practices) (Enders, 2001, p. 67)

Review of Literature Summary

Overall, the research illustrates the need for a transformation of writing curriculums. Test scores make it obvious that students do not possess strong writing skills. Students are not being allowed enough time to write in the classroom, and are not being presented with challenging writing assignments. Students need to realize that writing is an essential skill in their lives, and teachers should relate writing to the lives of students outside the classroom. Teachers need to take an active approach to teaching writing to their students. Writing instruction should stress the writing process. Students need to be instructed on the writing process and the steps essential to constructing strong pieces of writing. Since writing is a process, students need to be given the opportunity to revise their writing assignments. Also, teachers must allow students time to reflect on their own writing to enable them to examine and self evaluate their writing and writing process. Teaching writing through guided practice that allows for reflection, revision, and the writing process will help improve students’ writing ability.

CHAPTER 3

ACTION PLAN

Target Group

The group for this study will involve upper level ability tracked senior students at a south suburban high school. The students are 90 percent white with the other 10 percent of students being divided between African-American, Asian, and Hispanic. These students will be in an “honors class.” It is the highest of three ability tracks at the school. Students are placed in the track by test score achievement in their freshman year and then teacher recommendation once they are in the school.

Project Objective

Through the implementation of a teacher guided writing plan, students will strengthen their ability to analyze and develop their own writing process and as a result increase their own writing ability. The plan will be initiated from January 2005 to April 2005, and student progress will be assessed through the development of a teacher created writing rubric that measures areas in which high school student writing is traditionally deficient. Also, student progress will be assessed through performance on Prairie State testing prompts.

Methods of Assessment

Students’ writing progress will first be assessed through comparing the writing ability of students in two literature essays. The first essay will be a literary analysis of several short stories. Class discussion will highlight themes, symbols, and motifs in the text. After all stories have been discussed in class students will be given five essay prompts that reflect the topics and themes covered in class as they relate to the text. Students will be required to compose a 3-4 pages essay on the prompt. The first set of essays will be developed by the teacher to assess students’ writing in argument support and elaboration, relating argument to the text, and grammar and conventions. The second essay will be given later in the semester after students have been guided through a guided writing process. The second essay will be written on one longer novel that will be read in class. Each day during the discussion of the novel students will be given short writing assignments, and divided into groups to discuss themes, symbols, and motifs. Student writing assignments will mirror sections of essays. Students will reflect on the discussions in journals. All in class writing activities and journals will be compiled in a portfolio. Finally, students will be given five essays prompts and they will be required to choose one and write detailed essay. The second essay will be scored according to the same rubric provided for the first essay. All essays in the study will be score twice. The essays will be evaluated by a student teacher, and also a cooperating teacher. The rubric will assess students’ ability in five different areas. Focus of essay, support of argument essay organization, writing mechanics, and format will be assess on a 5-point scale in the essay.

In addition to assessing the progress of students’ writing through the scoring of essays based upon classroom curriculum, the students will also be assessed through prompts for the Prairie State examinations. Students will be given a writing prompt from the Prairie State examination at the end of the semester. The essays will be assessed according to the writing framework provide by the Prairie State Examination that include focus, support, organization, integration, and conventions (ISBE Writing Framework, 2003, 7).The scores from the examinations would be compared to the students’ scores from the previous year to monitor their progress, and look for improvement in their writing.

Project Outline

WEEK 1- Students given preliminary Prairie State Examination, short stories for the first essay assigned

WEEK-2- Beginning discussion on short stories, Prairie State essays prompts assessed

WEEK-3 Discussion of shorts stories continues

WEEK-4- Discussion of themes, ideas, trends in shorts stories, Essay Prompts given to students

WEEK-5- Preliminary discussion on upcoming novel, explanation of portfolio

WEEK-6- First essay due in class, Begin reading novel, novel discussion

WEEK-7- Guided practice in groups, Writing activities involve themes, ideas,

WEEK-8- Novel discussion continues, self-reflection journals, Essay topics assigned

WEEK-9- Concluding remarks on novel, overall reflection assignments, Second Prairie State prompt given

WEEK-10- Essays due in class, constructing portfolio during class time

WEEK-11- Portfolios due, Overall reflection and discussion on writing experiences

References

Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of Cognitive Skill. Psychologcial Review, 89, 369-406.

Enders, D. (2001). Crossing the Divide: A Survey of High School Activities That Best Prepared Students to Write in College. Clearing House, 75, 62-67.

Hurwitz, N., & Hurwitz, S. (2004). Words on Paper. American School Board Journal, 191, 1-5.

Illinois School Report Card 2003 [Brochure]. (2003).

ISBE Writing Framework for PSAE(2004). . ). Illinois State Board of Education.

Johnstone, K. M., Ashbaugh, H., & Warfield, T (2002). Effects of Repeated Practice and Contextual-Writing Experiences on College Students' Writing Skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 305-315.

Light, R. L. (2001). Making the Most of College. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

NAEP High School Transcript Study(2000). . ). U.S Deparment of Education. from

NAEP Writing,National Center for Educatioal Statistics. (2002). Retrieved June 1, 2004, from

National Education Descriptive Longitudinal Study: 1998-1994; Descriptive Summary Report(2001). . ). Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office.

Occupational Outlook Handbook 2002-2003(2002). . ). Washington: Government Printing Office. from

Reality Check:Social Promotion Is Declining Steadily in U.S. Schools . (2001). Public Agenda. Retrieved May 30, 2004, from

Reynolds, T. J., & P, Bruch. (2002). Curriculum and Affect: A Participatory Developmental Writing Approach. Journal of Developmental Education, 26, 12-20.

Saddler, B. (2004). Improve Writing Ability. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39, 310-314.

The Neglected "R", The Need for a Writing Revolution(2003). . ). The National Writing Project.

Writing Framework and Specifications for the 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress(1998). . ). National Assessment Governing Board.

[pic][pic][pic]

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download