Discourses of Writing and Learning to Write

Abstract

This paper presents a meta-analysis of theory and research about writing and writing pedagogy, identifying six discourses -configurations of beliefs and practices in relation to the teaching of writing. It introduces and explains a framework for the analysis of educational data about writing pedagogy in which the connections are drawn across views of language, views of writing, views of learning to write, approaches to the teaching of writing, and approaches to the assessment of writing. The framework can be used for identifying discourses of writing in data such as policy documents, teaching and learning materials, recordings of pedagogic practice, interviews and focus groups with teachers and learners, and media coverage of literacy education. The paper also proposes that, while there are tensions and contradictions among these discourses, a comprehensive writing pedagogy might integrate teaching approaches from all six.Keywords: discourses, writing, literacy, analytical framework, learning, teaching IntroductionMy aim is to present and explain a framework which I have developed for the analysis of a variety of types of data concerned with the teaching of writing: data such as policy documents, teaching and learning materials, recordings of pedagogic practice, interviews and focus groups with teachers and learners, and media coverage of literacy education. I propose that such data can be analysed for evidence of the underlying beliefs of those from whom it originated. Policy, practice and opinions about literacy education are usually underpinned, consciously or subconsciously, by particular ways of conceptualising writing, and by particular ways of conceptualising how writing can be learned. These different ways of conceptualising literacy lie at the heart of 'discourses' in the broadest sense: recognisable associations among values, beliefs and practices which lead to particular forms of situated action, to particular decisions, choices and omissions, as well as to particular wordings. The ways in which people talk about writing and learning to write, and the actions they take as learners, teachers and assessors, are instantiations of discourses of writing and learning to write: the purpose of this paper is to identify these discourses.I start by mentioning briefly the work of others who have discussed theories, metaphors, ideologies and discourses which underpin pedagogic practice in literacy education. I then present a view of language consisting of four interdependent layers, drawing on Fairclough (1989Fairclough ( , 1992a, Ivaniè (1998) and Jones (1990). The main part of the paper uses this view of language to structure the identification of six 'discourses of writing and learning to write' consisting of sets of beliefs about writing and learning to write, and practices of teaching and assessment of writing associated with these beliefs. Much of what I present in these sections has been discussed in greater detail elsewhere. I will do no more than outline the features of each set of beliefs and practices,...

Personal interests as incentive fo professional writing. Towards a writing pedagogy for Dutch universities of applied sciences

“…With its focus on the professional practice, Profile 1 suggests some kind of a social practices discourse (Ivanič, 2004): writers must be involved in purposeful, situated activities in which writing requires students to meet goals, and learn in reallife or simulated contexts, with an emphasis on the adequate fulfilment of a goal specified by some authority (e.g., an employer). In contrast, Profile 1 gives 'accessibility' as the first aspect of a communicative competence, paying attention to logical structure and publicly focused professional language, which fits a genre discourse, with its focus on the appropriate use of professional genres.…”

“…While Ivanič focuses on beliefs on writing (and learning to write), Klafki concentrates on the significance for the learner. Ivanič (2004) developed a framework in which she identifies six discourses of writing and learning to write. This framework allows for analyzing data from policy and educational documents to discern beliefs about writing and learning to write as well as practices of teaching and assessment of writing associated with these beliefs.…”

“…Ivanič's framework for the characterization of the discourses of writing and learning to write (Ivanič, 2004) serves as the main instrument for our data analysis. In addition, we used Klafki's Didaktik Analysis (Klafki, 2000) for the analysis of the justification of the intended and applied approaches of teaching and learning, since this is not the aim of Ivanič's framework.…”

English academic writing proficiency in higher education: Facilitating the transition from metalinguistic awareness to metalinguistic competence

“…Viewing the act of writing as social practice implies viewing writing as a meaning-making activity rooted in the cultural and social contexts in which it occurs (Cremin & Myhill 2012;Ivanič 2004). Within these contexts, people learn to write "implicitly by participating in socially situated literacy events which fulfill social goals which are relevant and meaningful to them" (Ivanič, 2004, p. 235).…”

Investigating student teachers’ presentations of literacy and literacy pedagogy in a complex context

“…These different discourses are significant to how we view literacy learning and the kinds of pedagogies that we see as appropriate (Ivanic 2004). Conceptualising literacy in teacher education is also complicated by shifts in how people engage with texts in everyday life.…”