“Writing to Learn in the Content Areas”: A Course Proposal



“Writing to Learn in the Content Areas”: A Course Proposal

The Washington State Writing Project (WSWP),

Sponsored by PSWP (UW) and CWWP (CWU)

General Project Objectives Participants will—

1. become acquainted with WTL—rationale, description, research-based evidence—to

support use of WTL;

2. learn to use through practice research-based writing-to-learn (WTL) strategies to

enhance student thinking and learning in the content area(s);

3. apply WTL strategies in their own classrooms, analyze their effectiveness,

and obtain feedback geared toward improving students’ knowledge, understandings, and performance;

4. select and/or design an appropriate WTL activity in support of content-area EALRs

that focus on particular concept(s), content, and/or skill(s).

5. Reflect upon experiences in the workshop and their students’ classroom performance.

Recommended Texts (Suggestion: excerpts/readings to be included within course pack.

See also resources recommended for individual workshop sessions.)

• Atwell, N. (Ed.). (1990). Coming to know: Writing to learn in the intermediate grades. Portsmouth,

NH: Heinemann.

• Gere, A. R. (1985). Roots in the sawdust: Writing to learn across the disciplines. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

• Herrington, A. H. (1981). Writing to learn: Writing across the disciplines. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

• Sorcinelli, M. D., & Elbow, P. (1997). Writing to learn: strategies for assigning and responding to writing across the disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 69.

• Soven, M. (1996). Write to learn: A guide to writing across the curriculum. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.

• Wills, H. (1993). Writing is learning: Strategies for math, science, social studies, and

language arts. Bloomington, IN: EDINFO Press.

• Young, A., & Fulwiler, T. (1986). Writing across the disciplines: Research into practice.

Upper Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook (Heinemann).

“Writing to Learn in the Content Areas”: A Course Proposal

Component 1

(based upon notes from 10/07/02 / L. Clifton)

Session Objectives Participants will—

• establish a writing/learning community

• identify essential needs and teacher objectives for their students

• make connections between subject matter EALRs and writing territories

• learn specific research-based WTL strategies

• adapt a specific WTL strategy for the classroom

Activities*

1, Community-building: Introductions, including professional background & interests,

emphasizing content areas/academic subjects & the role(s)

writing might play

2. Discussion Starter, focusing on identifying learner needs—participants draw or bring in

a photograph of a student.

Prompt: What do you want for this student? What do you need as a teacher to

more effectively provide for that student’s needs?

3. Research Connections (possible resources):

Ackerman, J. M. (July 1993). The promise of writing to learn. Written Communication, 10 (3): 334-

370.

Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. CCC , 28 (February): 122-127.

Walshe, R. D. (1987). The learning power of writing. English Journal, 76: 22-27.

4. Agenda: Establishing connections among expectations, needs, research

5. Writing Territories: teacher (personal + in the classroom); student writing

6. Connections between content-area EALRs and the Writing Territories

(WAC/WTL/WID, etc., plus Topic/Audience/Purpose + Modes)

POSSIBLE ACTIVITIES: Discussion / Focused Freewrites / Proposals

7. Demonstration: The Double-Entry Journal (Atwell, 1990) PROCEDURE:

• Use the left-hand column (or page) for drawings, diagrams, word clusters, maps,

or metaphors—and the right-hand column (or page) for “cooking” those ideas

in response to the social studies resource text (e.g, the Civil War) excerpt provided.

8. Homework: Bring in three classroom assignments you have used or are planning to use.

“Writing to Learn in the Content Areas”: A Course Proposal

Component 2

Session Objectives Participants will—

• continue to establish a writing/learning community • identify essential needs and teacher objectives for their students

• make connections between subject matter EALRs and writing territories

• learn specific research-based WTL strategies

• adapt a specific WTL strategy for the classroom

• explore ways in which WTL might serve participants’ students’ needs

• make connections across subject matter EALRs, student needs, and WTL strategies

Activities

1, Community-building: Writing activity informed by two WTL claims:

• writing provides opportunities to explore ideas and assumptions—

“…the more that content is manipulated [by students], the more likely it is to be remembered and understood.” (Langer & Applebee, 1987, as cited in Wills, 1993, p. 1).

• writing promotes exploration and reflection—

“…language provides us with a unique way of knowing and becomes a tool for discovering,

for shaping meaning, and for reaching understanding” (Fulwiler & Young, 1982, p. x).

Content-Area Focus: A work of visual art Source: P. Zimmerman, “Writing for Art

Appreciation” (in Gere, A. R., 1985: 31-45)

WTL Strategy: DIALOGUE. Write, Share, Discuss (partners/whole group):

Observations of note? Assumptions? Understandings? Questions?

√ How has DIALOGUING contributed to your/our learning?

2. Reflection Activity: EALR Connections

Participants consider the Essential Learnings that seem to be addressed by the above activity…Discuss/write about implications for instruction

3. Writing Territories: Content area-related writing forms: The ‘Genre Hypothesis’

Prompt: “Some researchers hypothesize that the type and structure of student texts affect

or otherwise contribute to student learning—and thinking” (Klein, 2000). Science-related subjects, for example, often call for such writing forms as reporting on experiments, or crafting environmental impact statements (EIS), forms that focus student attention on such skills as comparing and explaining.

Writing Territories: Content area-related writing forms, continued

Consider a type or form of writing that is associated with your content area: What writing and/or thinking skills might that form or type of writing require or encourage? What could be the implications for introducing such writing to learn strategies as DIALOGUING or DOUBLE-ENTRY JOURNALING to your students?

REFLECTION ACTIVITY: Share responses in small groups, record key ideas and discoveries, and then summarize discoveries for all workshop participants.

4. Research & Resource Connections: Jigsawing WTL Concepts, Strategies

‘Expert Teams’ read, discuss, then create a Concept Map of key ideas

for one article or text excerpt. Share out in Jigsaw groups.

Elbow, P. (1994). Writing for learning—not just for demonstrating learning. University of

Massachusetts, Amherst, 1-4.

Gere, A. R. (1985). Roots in the sawdust: Writing to learn across the disciplines. Urbana, IL:

NCTE.

Klein, P. D. (2000). Elementary students’ strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and

Instruction, 18 (3): 317-348.

Langer, J. A., & Applebee, A. N. (1987). How writing shapes thinking: A study of teaching and

learning. NCTE Research Report #22. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Wills, H. (1993). Writing is learning: Strategies for math, science, social studies, and language

arts. Bloomington, IN: EDINFO Press.

1. Homework Response (3 classroom assignments)

Focus: WTL + Writing Process (see comfort map / writing territories)

√ How might one or more of the WTL strategies we have addressed today serve to enhance, inform, or otherwise improve upon one of these three classroom assignments in support of student learning?

Focused Freewrite: What would be the ‘value added’? How might a particular

writing strategy or activity contribute to your students’

learning and understanding? Which EALRs might be addressed?

2. Modeled Closing Activity: The Five-Minute Essay (Angelo & Cross, 1993; Young, 1997)

1. What did you learn today?

2. What questions or concerns do you have?

Purpose/Rationale: Serves as a two-part Exit Slip, as respondents often discover knowledge gaps (1.), which in turn lead to the posing of focused questions (2.)

• Angelo, T. A. & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college

teachers, 2nd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Young, A. In Sorcinelli. M. D., & Elbow, P. (1997). Writing to learn: Strategies for assigning and

responding to writing across the disciplines. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 69.

3. Homework: Select a 2nd classroom assignment, as per Activity #5 above. Be prepared to share with your working team at the beginning of Session 3.

“Writing to Learn in the Content Areas”: A Course Proposal

Component 3: The Reading/Writing Connection

Session Objectives Participants will—

• continue the writing/learning community

• experience purposeful reading and writing activities as they represent flip sides of the

meaning-making coin (Dahl & Farnan, 1998);

• recognize characteristics of and connections between writing integral to learning (WTL)

and reading tasks & forms in the disciplines;

• select, adapt, and/or design WTL activities that enhance students’ active

reading of and engagement with disciplinary materials (texts, concepts, content);

• Reflect upon classroom results.

Themes to Consider

On Reading/Writing Recursivity: “…we need to consider how reading can influence writing, and moreover, how reading and writing might work together” (Tierney & Leys, 1986, p. 21).

On Constructing Meaning: “Readers take the written word and construct meaning based on their own thoughts, knowledge, and experience. The reader is part writer” (Harvey & Goudvis, 2000).

Additional Recommended Resources

Dahl, K. L., & Farnan, N. (1998). Children’s writing: Perspectives from research. Newark,

DE: IRA.

Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding readers and writers, grades 3-6: Teaching

comprehension, genre, & content literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Hanson, R. et al. (1991). Reading/writing relationships: Implications for teachers. In

Journal of the Wisconsin State Reading Association, 35 (1), 57-63.

Harvey, S. (1998). Nonfiction matters: Reading, writing, and research in grades 3-8.

York, ME: Stenhouse.

Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategies that work: Teaching comprehension to

Enhance understanding. York, ME: Stenhouse.

Tierney, R. J., & Leys, M. (1996). What is the value of connecting reading and writing? In

Peterson, B. T. (Ed.). Convergences: Transactions in reading and writing. (15-29).

Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Tierney, R., Soder, A., O’Flahavan, J., & Mcginley, W. (1989). The effects of reading and

Writing upon thinking critically. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 134-169.

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

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

Google Online Preview   Download