Writing Motivation of Students with Specific Language Impairments

This study was designed to compare the writing motivation of students with specific language impairments with their non-disabled peers. Due to the cognitive and linguistic demands of the writing process, students with language impairments face unique difficulties during the writing process. It was hypothesized that students with specific language impairments will be more likely to report lower levels of perceived writing competence and be less autonomously motivated to write. Students in grades 3-5 in 11 schools (33 with specific language impairments, 242 non-disabled peers) completed self-report measures, designed from a Self-Determination Theory perspective, which measured the degree that students are intrinsically motivated to write as well as their perceived writing competence. Statistical analyses showed that (1) students with specific language impairments reported lower levels of perceived writing competence and autonomous writing motivation; (2) SLI status was a significant predictor of perceived writing competence after spelling, grade, and gender were controlled; and (3) when spelling, grade, and gender were controlled, perceived writing competence was a significant predictor of autonomous writing motivation, but SLI status was not. The results of this study are expected to inform the current understanding of the relationship between language ability and writing motivation in students with specific language impairments, as well as the design of future writing interventions.

Editorial genesis: From comparing texts (product) to interpreting rewritings (process)

In literary genetics, “editorial genetics” deals with the “public life” of texts, whereas the writing process is affected by edition and diffusion. Editorial genetics frequently has to deal with cases of “editorial rewriting”: in the literary domain for example, authors frequently modify previously published works, so that several versions may co-exist. We are especially interested in Balzac’s La Bourse (translated in English as The Purse) since we know three authorized versions of this specific work.By comparing different texts associated with a single work, the literary geneticist is facing different products that are themselves the result of a writing process. However, different specificities should be outlined: (1) the writing process does not leave any trace: we just have access to different products/texts and (2) since the texts we compare seem to be achieved, differences must be referred, not to programmatic or temporary linguistic structures, but to the reconfiguration of a pre-existing textuality.Do such products still reflect the processes that have given birth to them? Does the comparison between two texts considered as variations of a same text give access to this transformation’s processes? After describing the objects of this particular textual comparison and the terminology that permits to give an account of such phenomenon, this contribution suggests to express these questions differently, as a matter of poetics of transitions between texts, or, further digging, an hermeneutics of the transition between texts.

A practice-based culminating experience: Writing a HRSA grant application with Texas Organ Sharing Alliance for public education efforts to increase solid organ donation

In November 2010, nearly 110,000 people in the United States were waiting for organs for transplantation. Despite the fact that the organ donor registration rate has doubled in the last year, Texas has the lowest registration rate in the nation. Due to the need for improved registration rates in Texas, this practice-based culminating experience was to write an application for federal funding for the central Texas organ procurement organization, Texas Organ Sharing Alliance. The culminating experience has two levels of significance for public health – (1) to engage in an activity to promote organ donation registration, and (2) to provide professional experience in grant writing. ^ The process began with a literature review. The review was to identify successful intervention activities in motivating organ donation registration that could be used in intervention design for the grant application. Conclusions derived from the literature review included (1) the need to specifically encourage family discussions, (2) religious and community leaders can be leveraged to facilitate organ donation conversations in families, (3) communication content must be culturally sensitive and (4) ethnic disparities in transplantation must be acknowledged and discussed.^ Post the literature review; the experience followed a five step process of developing the grant application. The steps included securing permission to proceed, assembling a project team, creation of a project plan and timeline, writing each element of the grant application including the design of proposed intervention activities, and completion of the federal grant application. ^ After the grant application was written, an evaluation of the grant writing process was conducted. Opportunities for improvement were identified. The first opportunity was the need for better timeline management to allow for review of the application by an independent party, iterative development of the budget proposal, and development of collaborative partnerships. Another improvement opportunity was the management of conflict regarding the design of the intervention that stemmed from marketing versus evidence-based approaches. The most important improvement opportunity was the need to develop a more exhaustive evaluation plan.^ Eight supplementary files are attached to appendices: Feasibility Discussion in Appendix 1, Grant Guidance and Workshop Notes in Appendix 2, Presentation to Texas Organ Sharing Alliance in Appendix 3, Team Recruitment Presentation in Appendix 5, Grant Project Narrative in Appendix 7, Federal Application Form in Appendix 8, and Budget Workbook with Budget Narrative in Appendix 9.^

Writing for success:mentoring as a pedagogical tool – a cross- institutional study

The prominent position given to academic writing across contemporary academia is reflected in the substantive literature and debate devoted to the subject over the past 30 years. However, the massification of higher education, manifested by a shift from elite to mass education, has brought the issue into the public arena, with much debate focusing on the need for ‘modern-day' students to be taught how to write academically (Bjork et al., 2003; Ganobcsik-Williams, 2006). Indeed, Russell (2003) argued that academic writing has become a global ‘problem' in Higher Education because it sits between two contradictory pressures (p.V). On one end of the university ‘experience' increasing numbers of students, many from non-traditional backgrounds, enter higher education bringing with them a range of communication abilities. At the other end, many graduates leave university to work in specialised industries where employers expect them to have high level writing skills (Ashton, 2007; Russell, 2003; Torrence et al., 1999). By drawing attention to the issues around peer mentoring within an academic writing setting in three different higher education Institutions, this paper makes an important contribution to current debates. Based upon a critical analysis of the emergent findings of an empirical study into the role of peer writing mentors in promoting student transition to higher education, the paper adopts an academic literacies approach to discuss the role of writing mentoring in promoting transition and retention by developing students' academic writing. Attention is drawn to the manner in which student expectations of writing mentoring actually align with mentoring practices - particularly in terms of the writing process and critical thinking. Other issues such as the approachability of writing mentors, the practicalities of accessing writing mentoring and the wider learning environment are also discussed.

The impact of increased writing time allotment on the developmental writing skills of intermediate elementary school students

The purpose of this study is to determine which of several treatment groups and/or grades have shown growth when increased writing time allotment has occurred. Third, fourth and fifth grade students identified as Gifted, Learning Disabled, and Limited English Proficient enrolled in ESOL classes were the 69 subjects.^ All students were allotted at least one hour of writing time, four days a week for the school year of 1994-1995. Writing activities conducted during the school year involved the full writing process, including prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. Pretests and posttests were administered across the grade levels at a designated period of time using the same administration procedures as the Florida Writing Assessment Program. Three teachers rated each sample on a scale of zero to three.^ The results of the oneway ANOVA indicated that the three raters did not score the pretests and posttests significantly different from each other. A single group pretest-posttest experimental design was used on the three groups. The results of the Gifted group revealed that the Gifted C subgroup (Gifted Behavioral) appeared to have averaged a higher gain score than both the Gifted A and Gifted B subgroups. For the four subgroups of the LD group, no distinct pattern was evident. The Group C subgroup (ADD) appeared to have scored lower than the other three subgroup although their mean IQ score was higher than the others LD subgroups. Comparisons were difficult to make among the four ESOL subgroups due to low subjects and/or scores. Qualitative analyses were also conducted using semi-structured interviews with the Gifted, Learning Disabled, and ESOL teachers. All believed the additional instructional time spent on writing made the difference in the increased writing scores.^ The study indicated that time alone is not a significant factor in developing accomplished writers. Direct instruction perhaps in a specific strategy or skill may lead to significant results. ^

The will to write: Students' and teachers' perceptions of writing

This study investigated the perceptions of writing among secondary and post-secondary students and their teachers. The focus was on students' writing philosophy and influences, perceptions of the writing process, and perceptions of student writing skills, high stakes assessment tests, and writing across the curriculum. ^ An ethnographic case study was used to investigate the perceptions of writing among ten students and their English teachers in two high schools, a community college, and a university. To establish balance and ethnic plurality, seven females and three males representing the four large ethnic groups in South Florida—African American, Haitian American, European American and Latino—participated. During one four-month term, data from written samples of students' writing, formal and informal interviews, a student focus group, field notes, classroom observations, and a “think-aloud” protocol were collected. ^ Four themes emerged. First, Florida's writing assessment test has a negative influence on students' perceptions of writing. Students' motivation and attitudes as well as their confidence in their abilities were affected by practice and preparation in “recital writing.” Second, writing is a vehicle of social and personal transformation. Students believed that writing is a mean to connect to others and to create change in schools and communities. Third, students lacked the ability to connect writing, thinking and learning. Although students and teachers agree with statements about this connection, students failed to see the relevance of thinking and learning through writing in current or future courses, or in their future careers. Finally, writing context, teachers, schools, peers and gender influenced writing perceptions. Students believed that their writing philosophy, writing process, and perceptions of writing in academia and in the workplace are connected to these five factors. ^ The effect of the Florida writing test pervades students' and teachers' writing perceptions, making a stronger case for writing across the curriculum than previous research. Writing should help students see knowledge as interrelated, honor students' interests and values, and build relationships between and among students, schools and communities. In designing and implementing methods that support and sustain student writing, teachers should provide students with multiple opportunities to expand knowledge, learning, and connection through writing. ^

An analysis of student and instructor perceptions of students' writing skills at the university level

This study examined university students' writing skills as perceived by university students and their English instructors. The goal of the study was to provide English instructors with objective, quantified information about writing perceptions from both the students' and instructors' viewpoints. ^ A survey instrument was developed based on a survey instrument created by Newkirk, Cameron, and Selfe (1977) to identify instructors' perceived knowledge of student writing skills. The present study used a descriptive statistical design. It examined five writing skill areas: attitude, content, grammar and mechanics, literary considerations, and the writing process through a questionnaire completed by a convenience sample of summer and fall admitted freshmen who were enrolled in Essay Writing and Freshman Composition courses and English Department instructors at a large South Florida public university. ^ The study consisted of five phases. The first phase was modifying of the Newkirk, Cameron, and Selfe (1977) questionnaire. Two versions of the revised survey were developed - one for instructors and one for students. The second phase was pilot testing the questionnaire for evaluation of administration and scoring. The third phase was administering the questionnaire to 1,280 students and 48 instructors. The fourth phase was analyzing the data. The study found a significant difference in the perceptions of students and instructors in all areas of writing skills examined by the survey. Responses to 29 of 30 questions showed that students felt they had better attitudes toward writing and better writing skills than instructors thought. ^ The final phase was developing recommendations for practice. Based on findings and theory and empirical evidence drawn from the fields of adult education and composition research, learner-centered, self-directed curriculum guidelines are offered. ^ By objectively quantifying student and instructor perceptions of students' writing skills, this study contributes to a growing body of literature that: (a) encourages instructors to acknowledge the perception disparities between instructors and students; (b) gives instructors a better understanding of how to communicate with students; and (c) recommends the development of new curriculum, placement tests, and courses that meet the needs of students and enables English instructors to provide meaningful instruction. ^

The use of a computer graphic organizer for persuasive composition writing by Hispanic students with specific learning disabilities

Many culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) struggle with the writing process. Particularly, they have difficulties developing and expanding ideas, organizing and elaborating sentences, and revising and editing their compositions (Graham, Harris, & Larsen, 2001; Myles, 2002). Computer graphic organizers offer a possible solution to assist them in their writing. This study investigated the effects of a computer graphic organizer on the persuasive writing compositions of Hispanic middle school students with SLD. A multiple baseline design across subjects was used to examine its effects on six dependent variables: number of arguments and supporting details, number and percentage of transferred arguments and supporting details, planning time, writing fluency, syntactical maturity (measured by T-units, the shortest grammatical sentence without fragments), and overall organization. Data were collected and analyzed throughout baseline and intervention. Participants were taught persuasive writing and the writing process prior to baseline. During baseline, participants were given a prompt and asked to use paper and pencil to plan their compositions. A computer was used for typing and editing. Intervention required participants to use a computer graphic organizer for planning and then a computer for typing and editing. The planning sheets and written composition were printed and analyzed daily along with the time each participant spent on planning. The use of computer graphic organizers had a positive effect on the planning and persuasive writing compositions. Increases were noted in the number of supporting details planned, percentage of supporting details transferred, planning time, writing fluency, syntactical maturity in number of T-units, and overall organization of the composition. Minimal to negligible increases were noted in the mean number of arguments planned and written. Varying effects were noted in the percent of transferred arguments and there was a decrease in the T-unit mean length. This study extends the limited literature on the effects of computer graphic organizers as a prewriting strategy for Hispanic students with SLD. In order to fully gauge the potential of this intervention, future research should investigate the use of different features of computer graphic organizer programs, its effects with other writing genres, and different populations.

The effects of word prediction and text-to-speech technologies on the narrative writing skills of students with specific learning disabilities

This study investigated the effects of word prediction and text-to-speech on the narrative composition writing skills of 6, fifth-grade Hispanic boys with specific learning disabilities (SLD). A multiple baseline design across subjects was used to explore the efficacy of word prediction and text-to-speech alone and in combination on four dependent variables: writing fluency (words per minute), syntax (T-units), spelling accuracy, and overall organization (holistic scoring rubric). Data were collected and analyzed during baseline, assistive technology interventions, and at 2-, 4-, and 6-week maintenance probes. ^ Participants were equally divided into Cohorts A and B, and two separate but related studies were conducted. Throughout all phases of the study, participants wrote narrative compositions for 15-minute sessions. During baseline, participants used word processing only. During the assistive technology intervention condition, Cohort A participants used word prediction followed by word prediction with text-to-speech. Concurrently, Cohort B participants used text-to-speech followed by text-to-speech with word prediction. ^ The results of this study indicate that word prediction alone or in combination with text-to-speech has a positive effect on the narrative writing compositions of students with SLD. Overall, participants in Cohorts A and B wrote more words, more T-units, and spelled more words correctly. A sign test indicated that these perceived effects were not likely due to chance. Additionally, the quality of writing improved as measured by holistic rubric scores. When participants in Cohort B used text-to-speech alone, with the exception of spelling accuracy, inconsequential results were observed on all dependent variables. ^ This study demonstrated that word prediction alone or in combination assists students with SLD to write longer, improved-quality, narrative compositions. These results suggest that word prediction or word prediction with text-to-speech be considered as a writing support to facilitate the production of a first draft of a narrative composition. However, caution should be given to the use of text-to-speech alone as its effectiveness has not been established. Recommendations for future research include investigating the use of these technologies in other phases of the writing process, with other student populations, and with other writing styles. Further, these technologies should be investigated while integrated into classroom composition instruction. ^

Joining the Conversation: Graduate Students' Perceptions of Writing for Publication

The authors report on their qualitative study of eight students in a class on writing for publication and the nature of the writing process in academia. While the participants found value and purpose in writing and scholarly writing, they had great difficulty with criticism and using feedback in constructive ways.

The Use of a Computer Graphic Organizer for Persuasive Composition Writing by Hispanic Students with Specific Learning Disabilities

Many culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) struggle with the writing process. Particularly, they have difficulties developing and expanding ideas, organizing and elaborating sentences, and revising and editing their compositions (Graham, Harris, & Larsen, 2001; Myles, 2002). Computer graphic organizers offer a possible solution to assist them in their writing. This study investigated the effects of a computer graphic organizer on the persuasive writing compositions of Hispanic middle school students with SLD. A multiple baseline design across subjects was used to examine its effects on six dependent variables: number of arguments and supporting details, number and percentage of transferred arguments and supporting details, planning time, writing fluency, syntactical maturity (measured by T-units, the shortest grammatical sentence without fragments), and overall organization. Data were collected and analyzed throughout baseline and intervention. Participants were taught persuasive writing and the writing process prior to baseline. During baseline, participants were given a prompt and asked to use paper and pencil to plan their compositions. A computer was used for typing and editing. Intervention required participants to use a computer graphic organizer for planning and then a computer for typing and editing. The planning sheets and written composition were printed and analyzed daily along with the time each participant spent on planning. The use of computer graphic organizers had a positive effect on the planning and persuasive writing compositions. Increases were noted in the number of supporting details planned, percentage of supporting details transferred, planning time, writing fluency, syntactical maturity in number of T-units, and overall organization of the composition. Minimal to negligible increases were noted in the mean number of arguments planned and written. Varying effects were noted in the percent of transferred arguments and there was a decrease in the T-unit mean length. This study extends the limited literature on the effects of computer graphic organizers as a prewriting strategy for Hispanic students with SLD. In order to fully gauge the potential of this intervention, future research should investigate the use of different features of computer graphic organizer programs, its effects with other writing genres, and different populations.

Straw - structured reading, analysis and writing in humanities disciplines

Technology provides a range of tools which facilitate parts of the process of reading, analysis and writing in humanities, but these tools are limited and poorly integrated. Methods of providing students with the skills to make good use of a range of tools to create an integrated, structured process of writing in the disciplines are examined, compared and critiqued. Tools for mindmapping and outlining are examined both as reading tools and as tools to structure knowledge and explore ontology creation. Interoperability between these and common wordprocessors is examined in order to explore how students may be taught to develop a structured research and writing process using currently available tools. Requirements for future writing tools are suggested

Writing Violence: the legal, moral and aesthetic Implications of creative non-fiction.

This essay began as a hybrid critical/creative paper that was presented as part of an all-female panel discussing the intersections between writing and extreme violence. My own paper was on the relationship between my creative nonfiction novel The Museum of Atheism and the real life murder of six-year-old beauty queen, JonBenet Ramsey. This essay is an attempt to represent the writing process of the creative nonfiction author, and to consider the ways in which critical theory can be used to highlight, or conversely obscure, fictional writing. In addition to considering the effect of using a real story, a true crime, as the basis for a semi-fictional work, this essay will also consider the relationship I had as a writer to my publisher, editor and agent, and their interventions in the writing process to ensure that facts were deliberately skewed or warped in order to avoid litigation. Finally, I will consider my own relationship to the material, and the impact that this had on the writing process.

Guided portfolio writing as a scaffold for reflective learning in in-service contexts: a case study

Language is widely recognized as an inescapable mediating tool for professional learning, and with this text we want to contribute to a better understanding of the particular role that guided writing can play in in-service professional reflective learning. We analysed one pre-school teacher’s written portfolio, the construction of which was guided to scaffold deep thinking about (and the transference of theory into) practice during participation in an in-service program about language education. Our case study shows that the writing process sustained robust learning about professional knowing, doing and learning itself: The teacher elaborated an integrative ethical understanding of the discussed theory, fully experienced newly informed practices and assessed her own learning by using theory to confront her previous knowledge and practices. Throughout the portfolio, the learning stance revealed by her voice varied accordingly. The study illustrates the potential of guided writing to scaffold reflective learning in in-service contexts.

The “handwriting brain”: a motor/linguistic network with specialized “writing-specific” areas?

International audience