Expressive Journal Writing for Comprehending Literature: A Strategy for Evoking Cognitive Complexity

Abstract

Whereas traditional reading instruction methods advocate text-based questions to guide students' thinking from literal comprehension to critical understanding of text, reader-based instruction promotes the use of journal writing for guiding comprehension. Through response journals, students are able to construct their own meaning of the text, making connections between the text and their own lives. We conducted a study in 11th-grade literature classes to determine the types and depths of cognitive complexity that readers of high, average, and low reading ability would exhibit when given either text-based comprehension questions or reader-based journal response writing assignments. Quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed significant differences between the two groups in type and depth of cognitive complexity, engagement with the text, and metacognitive processing.Which helps readers develop a fuller understanding of literary text-teacherdirected questioning or student-directed self-questioning through dialogue journals? In this article, we argue for a reader-response approach to classroom instruction of literary text as an alternative to the traditional text-based questions that are commonly used as a comprehension strategy. Expressive journal writing not only offers a platform for cognitive complexity, but also allows for individual differences in comprehension development. COMPREHENDING LITERATURE THROUGH WRITINGWhen a student moves into the secondary grades, the reading demands placed on him or her are much more diverse than those in the earlier grades. ComThe authors would like to acknowledge the invaluable assistance of several people involved in this study: Janet Emig, for providing overall guidance; Patricia Tudor, for coding the writing samples; John Young, for providing statistical assistance; and, last but not least, the llth-

Teachers implementing writing‐to‐learn strategies in junior secondary science: A case study

“…For example, Klein (1999) in concurring with the general findings of the other reviews, noted that various studies (Durst, 1987;Langer & Applebee, 1987;Schumacher & Nash, 1991) reported mixed conclusions on the value of analytical writing. Similarly, research studies on personal, journal writing (MacDonald & Cooper, 1992;Mulchay-Ernt & Ryshkewitch, 1994;Newell, Suszymski, & Weingart, 1989) only provided ambiguous support for the value of this genre for learning. As Klein (1999) observed, a further problem with most of these studies was that they failed to provide a detailed account of the classroom context or the teacher's method or focus of instruction, and therefore provided very limited evidence of the effects of these factors on student learning.…”

Student learning through journal writing in a general education chemistry course for pre‐elementary education majors

“…In precollege work, one of the most common forms of writing to learn is done by informal personal journal responses related to educational experiences such as literary readings, scientific experiments, videos, or from discourse with others (Kahaney & Heinrich, 1994; Keys et al, 1999; Martin, 1992; Mulcahy‐Ernt & Ryshkewitch, 1994). The process of writing journals helps with the process of understanding relationships among ideas, knowledge transformation, and construction of new meaning (Klein, 1999; Wallace, 2007).…”