Writing in the Natural Sciences and Engineering

Annotated Research

Question: What kinds of writing do students in the natural sciences and engineering do and what are the most valued writing skills needed for that writing?

Answer: “75% of the writing tasks were lab reports and summary and paraphrase were the dominant skills needed to write them.” G Braine. 1989. 207.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” JD Marshall and RK Durst, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), 205-221.

Dialogue Journals

Annotated Research

Question: What are the effects of dialogue journals between students and teachers?

 Answer: “The use of dialogue journals was extremely helpful in encouraging young children to read and write.” BA Bode. 1988. P. 207.

Comment: Once again the accumulation of studies reinforces the value of dialogue journals between students and teacher. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” JD Marshall and RK Durst, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), 205-221.

Audience and Writing

Annotated Research

Question: What was the effect of giving student writers information about audience?

Answer: “Participants given information about their audience wrote papers judged to be more persuasive than papers written by those who were not given such information.” K Black. 1989. P. 207.

Comment: Someone once said that it is not major research studies that give conclusive evidence of reliable findings; it is the accumulation of studies that should make teachers take notice. If accumulated studies say anything about audience and writing, it is that using knowledge of audience improves writing. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” JD Marshall and RK Durst, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), 205-221.

Writing on the Job

Annotated Research

Question: How much time is spent in writing per day by Department of Defense professionals?

Answer: “Respondents spent between 25% and 40% of a typical work day writing.” CL Davis and FF Stohrer. 1989. P. 207.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” JD Marshall and RK Durst, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), 205-221.

Collaborative Writing in the Real World

Research

Question: What are some causes of failure in collaborative writing?

Answer/Quote: “This ethnographic study identifies and analyzes 16 factors that influenced a largely unsuccessful collaborative writing process in a nonacademic setting, the 77-day production of a two-page executive letter of an annual report.” P. 173.

Quote: “While previous studies have focused upon successful collaborations, this one focuses on important drawbacks of peer and hierarchical editing in a real-world context.” P. 173.

Quote: “Yet during the editing process, subordinates had made important suggestions that would have improved the end-product, including explaining statistics and candidly stating underwriting and tax problems. This approach very probably would have made policy holders more open to rate increases. But subordinates were not in a position to contest the approved version. Thus the hierarchical nature of the company eliminated divergent viewpoints that could have improved the letter considerably.” P. 187.

Quote: “Most importantly, members of student and professional writing groups need to be fully aware that collaboration is much more than writers putting words on paper in the right syntactical and denotative order.  They must know that group writing is a political process involving power and conflict stemming both from the nature of groups and from the nature of language. The better their techniques of collaboration, the better the odds that power and conflict will be channeled toward constructive ends.” P. 200.

Title: “A Bakhtinian Exploration of Factors Affecting the Collaborative Writing of an Executive Letter of an Annual Report.” GA Cross. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), 173-203.

Informal Writing and ESL Students

Research

 Question: What are the benefits to ESL students of informal writing in dialogue journals?

Answer/Quote: “This paper reports the findings of an in-depth study of 12 sixth grade ESL students’ writing by comparing their written production on three teacher-assigned tasks with their writing to the teacher in their dialogue journals.” P. 142.

Quote: “The results suggest that ESL students may explore and demonstrate a more complete range of their writing abilities in ‘unassigned’ writing about self-chosen topics where there is a communicative purpose and a genuine response, than in ‘assigned’ writing about teacher-chosen topics, produced for evaluative purposes. It is argued therefore that although a variety of assigned writing tasks are essential for developing students’ expressive abilities in various types of writing, unassigned writing in which students choose their own topics and purpose may also be a necessary part of an ESL writing program.” P. 142.

Quote: “The study contributes to the ongoing discussion of the usefulness of providing opportunities for informal writing about student-chosen topics as part of an overall program for developing writing competence among limited English proficient students.” P. 143.

Quote: “Thus, unassigned writing of the sort that can occur in dialogue journals might be an important aspect of any writing program—with high- as well as low-proficiency students—as an opportunity for them to reflect on and personalize what they are learning, consider new ideas without having to worry about particular genre and structure conventions, explore the relevance of academic content for their own lives, and make connections between academic content and their own ideas.” P. 167.

Comment: Makes sense. Controls on formal assignments might restrict ESL students’ development of their written expression. RayS.

Title: “The Influence of Writing Task on ESL Students’ Written Production.” JK Peyton, et al. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), pp. 142-171.

Children's Literature by White Authors and Black Authors

Research

Question: Is there a difference between children’s authors about the black experience by white authors and by black authors?

 Answer/Quotes:

Abstract: “This study analyzes four prize-winning children’s books about the black experience in America. Three of the books were written by white authors and one by a black author. Analysis revealed that authors’ perceptions of religious and social values held by black Americans are influenced by a selective version of American history and by the authors’ own cultural background. In this sample, the books written by white authors ascribed to black characters a theology of racial submission which calls for acceptance of a subservient role in American society. In the book written from a black perspective, religious belief is characterized by spiritual resistance to oppression and a heritage of racial pride.

“It is concluded that books about the black experience in America must be evaluated in terms of a selective historic and religious tradition in light of the cultural background of the authors.” P. 117.

Quote: “A society’s literary heritage is often assumed to represent and reflect the traditions, customs, values and principles of that society. It is thought of as a history, a record, of the society that produced it. Yet thoughtful critics of America’s literary heritage have pointed out that there exists in American literature, as in the literature of many societies, a ‘selective tradition’ whereby the power of certain groups to shape a society’s literary heritage and to control the dissemination of knowledge results in a carefully defined version of the history and culture of the society.” P. 117.

Quote: “If children’s literature is to provide for children characters with whom it is healthy and meaningful to identify, if it is to provide a view of life which they recognize as authentic and one in which they can find possibilities for their own lives; the shortcoming of such books as Amos Fortune, Free Man, Sounder, and Words by Heart are all too clear. As long as these books continue to be read by children and as long as they continue to be endorsed by adults, it is important that they be read with a critical perspective. Indeed, the very fact that they have been selected as winners of children’s book awards indicates the need for adults who are involved with children’s literature to become informed about the existence and effects of a selective tradition and the limitations in perspective inherent in a writer’s ethnic and cultural background.” P. 139.

Comment: This study has sent me back to re-read these award-winning children’s books. The book by a black author is Roll of Thunder, Hear MY Cry (Taylor, 1976). RayS.

Title: “A Submission Theology for Black Americans: Religion and Social Action in Prize-winning Children’s Books about the Black Experience in America.” Research in the Teaching of English (May 1990), pp. 117-140.

Voice in Student Writing

Question: How do teachers define “voice” in student writing?

Answer: “…teachers often expressed a meta-cognitive awareness of the challenges they encountered when striving to make their standards for voice vis-à-vis a specific sample of student writing.”

Comment: “Voice” in student writing is a murky term, not clearly defined. It’s meant to express an individual’s individuality in written expression, rather than an assumed voice like a skeptic. It really has no place at the present time in high-stakes evaluation of student writing. RayS.

Title: “Subjectivity, Intentionality and Manufactured Moves: Teachers’ Perceptions of Voice in the Evaluation of Secondary Students’ Writing.” JV Jeffery. Research in the Teaching of English (August 2011), 92-127.

Researchers and Teachers

Research

Question: How should researchers deal with classroom problems when conducting research?

Answer: The answer is not an answer. It’s a framing of the question. In attempting to encourage using English learners’ [English as a second language] background and cultural diversity as a positive involvement in teaching English as a second language, how should researchers proceed with a group of teachers in the class who believe that the language diversity is a deficit in learning English? Should the researcher let the disagreement run its course without intervening or should the researchers intervene on behalf of the theme of the course?

Comment: In this case the researchers are the teachers. Their purpose is to encourage the use of diversity as a positive factor in learning a second language. In this case, they can’t be both teachers and objective researchers. RayS.

Title: “Constructing Difference Differently in Language an Literacy Professional Development.” TP Crumpler, LJ Handsfield and JR Dean. Research in the Teaching of English (August 2011), 55-88.

Writing, Drawing and Communication

Research

Question: How can children use all means of communication, especially drawing, in learning to communicate in writing?

Answer: The progression in paper size should not reduce itself to lined paper, but should encourage all means of communication, especially drawing, in learning to write. Technology will provide the picture-making ability.

Comment: In this multi-composing world, encouraging composition by drawing makes sense, especially if technology can make up for us who are drawing-challenged. It will certainly add a dimension to learning to write. RayS. 

Title: “Children’s Text Development: Drawing, Pictures, and Writing.” Mary Christianakis. Research in the Teaching of English (August 2011), 22-54.

Reading Aloud to Students

Question: What are the values of reading aloud to students?

Answer: “[Fourth- and sixth-grade] students who listened to oral reading three times a week for twelve weeks showed gains in attitude, amount of recreational reading and comprehension.” MS Cosgrove. 1987. P. 446.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Writing in Biology

Annotated Research

 Question: What are the values of using writing in biology?

 Answer: “Writing helped students think, remember, clarify, retain ideas, and see other points of view.” FE Reynolds. 1987. P. 445.

Comment: Of course I knew all that, but it helps to have research confirm it. And, of course, there is the question of what kinds of writing? RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

NoteTaking and Comprehension

Annotated Research

Question: What effect does taking notes have on comprehension of reading material?

Answer: “Note taking significantly improved students’ comprehension regardless of ability level.” JE Faber. 1987. P. 445.

Comment: Makes sense. But what kinds of notes? Paraphrase? Brief quotes? Key words? RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Interpreting Poetry

Annotated Research

Question: How can written responses help students interpret poems?

Answer: “Results suggest that extended writing based on subjective reactions may help readers construct meaning from poetry.” CA Colvin-Murphy. 1987. Pp. 444-445.

Comment: Not sure what “extended writing” means, but I’m guessing that attempting to construct meaning of poems through writing, whether organized or not, helps students find their way to meaning. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Rhetoric and Models

Annotated Research

Question: What do three separate systems of rhetoric reveal about learning to write?

Answer: “Each of three rhetorics stressed imitation as a way of learning structure and style.” JC McDonald. 1987. P. 444.

Comment: Seems to reinforce that using models is a legitimate method for learning to write. On the other hand, when I was a college freshman, the instructor presented us with a book of model essays, but he failed to point out how to learn from them. Students need something more than simply reading models. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Holistic Scoring

Annotated Research

Question: What are significant predictors in holistic scoring of writing?

Answer: “Only mechanics and appearance were significant predictors of holistic scores.” CC Stach. 1987. P. 444.

Comment: My impression of a number of research studies seems to indicate that mechanics, in spite of instructions not to pay special attention to them, do affect holistic ratings of writing. The second significant factor, appearance, would become a non-factor if students could use a word processor when writing test essays. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Explanatory Writing

Annotated Research

Question: What is the goal of “explanatory writing”?

 Answer: “Defines explanatory discourse in terms of a particular goal: promoting understanding for lay readers of some phenomenon.” KE Rowan. 1988. P. 441.

Comment: Couldn’t ask for a clearer purpose for writing. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Literacy

Annotated Research

Question: What is the meaning of literacy for males and females?

Answer: “For males, literacy tended to represent a means of achieving autonomy, while for females it was a means of participation.” SK Rose. 19987. P. 441.

Comment: I don’t know what this finding means, but it got my attention. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Audience and Writing

Annotated Research

Question: When should the student writer pay special attention to the audience?

Answer: “Among college freshmen, found that attending to audience is less effective as a drafting strategy than as a revising strategy.” DH Roane and RJ Willey. 1988. P. 441.

Comment: I think that finding is significant. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Collaborative Writing

Annotated  Research

Question: Did training in academic English prepare writers for writing collaboratively with engineers and computer scientists?

Answer: “Writers’ academic English backgrounds and on-site training did not prepare them for collaborative writing with engineers and computer scientists.” BE Heneghan. 1987. P. 440.

Comment: Why? This annotation gives rise to many questions. Was it personality? Was it lack of knowledge of writing skill on the part of the engineers and computer scientists? Was it failure to know the kinds of technical material required?

I’m not surprised that training in academic writing in English does not help with technical writing. My purpose in reviewing this finding is to raise the questions. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Persuasion

Annotated Research

Question: What are two characteristics of successful persuasive essays?

Answer: “Persuasiveness of essays was most strongly related to strategic adaptation and quality of audience analysis.” KM Black. 19987. P. 439.

 Comment: Seems like a no-brainer, but it isn’t easy. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.

Group Process

Annotated Research

Question: What is a successful group?

Answer: “Found that teachers and students have very different perspectives on what constitutes a successful group.” M Tebo-Messino. 1987. P. 428.

Comment: Since this is an annotated research summary, it doesn’t spell out the differences between the teachers’ and the students’ point of view. However, asking the same question of your students and contrasting their point of view with yours should lead to a fruitful discussion. RayS.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English.” RK Durst and JD Marshall, Eds. Research in the Teaching of English (December 1988), 434-452.