The Effects of Writing on Learning from Expository Text

Newell, George E.; Winograd, Peter

doi:10.1177/0741088389006002004

Cited by 48 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One finding of Langer's and Applebee's three studies that has important implications for teachers of environmental science is that different kinds of writing tasks result in different kinds of cognitive operations, and hence different kinds of learning. (This conclusion has been replicated in other studies; see, for example : Durst 1987, Newell and Winograd 1989, Tierney and others 1989 For example, notetaking, answering comprehension questions, and summarizing may be the tasks of choice when the instructor's purpose is to review a general body of information with the goal of reinforcing students' recognition and recall skills. However, analytic writing will be the task of choice when the emphasis is upon concepts and relationships in contexts, where these relationships are more important than memory for a large body of facts.…”

Section: Using Written and Verbal Dialogue As Modes Of Thinking And Lmentioning

confidence: 52%

Dialogic writing as a tool for thinking and learning about the environment

Hylton

Lemons

1992

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT/Competence in understanding and resolving environmental problems requires a curriculum that integrates traditional disciplines with applied problem-solving skills and/ or methods. Building upon the work of scholars who are calling for curriculum reform so that students may understand better the ethical dimensions of environmental problems, we analyze the theory of using dialogic writing to think and learn about the environment, and we provide examples of application of this technique.Two fundamental questions underlie the ongoing curriculum reform efforts taking place in colleges and universities across America today: Upon graduation, what should our students know, and what should they be able to do? Increasingly, educators at all levels are acknowledging that, with information accumulating and changing at a startlingly rapid rate, it is a fallacy to think that we can teach, or to expect that our students can study and learn, all of the facts of the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. The proliferation in recent years of articles and books on the topic of teaching critical thinking and problem-solving skills across disciplines (Heiman and Slomianko 1987, Kurfiss 1988, Maimon and others 1989) speaks to a recognition that the traditional goal of students' mastery of often extremely narrow and specialized content must be revised in the direction of their acquisition of some basic understandings of those disciplines that constitute the ways that we make sense of our lives and our world and of ways of thinking that will facilitate those understandings. Students graduating into the 21st century must possess a wealth of knowledge that crosses departmental lines and must be able to communicate effectively, think critically, and practice applied problem-solving strategies.Environmental educators are among those who are calling for this broadening of educational goals. In fact, some believe that, by their very nature, environmental education programs are an ideal model for interdisciplinary study, given the scientific, economic, legal, political, philosophical, psychological, social, and global as-

show abstract

Section: Using Written and Verbal Dialogue As Modes Of Thinking And Lmentioning

confidence: 52%

Dialogic writing as a tool for thinking and learning about the environment

Hylton

Lemons

1992

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, as Jones (1991) documents and recommends, if these topics were to be used as a context for writing, both knowledge and interest may be enhanced, leading to the development of more complex and creative ideas (Konopek et al, 1991). A higher level of content integration (Newell & Winograd, 1989) may also be the result.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results here suggest that writing prompts might be useful, at least for students lacking experience in informal and personal writing in science. Based on views offered by Soter (1987), Ruth & Murphy (1988), Newell & Winograd (1989), White (1989) and Konopek et al (1991), it is likely that with the appropriate writing prompts, a writing activity for students can be less difficult and confusing, motivating them to develop more complex and creative science-related ideas, and encouraging the expression of a higher level of content integration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Informal Science Writing Produced by Boys and Girls: writing preference and quality

Levine

Geldman-Caspar

1996

British Educational Res J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Five informal science-related writing tasks of 374 seventh grade boys and girls (ages 12-13) from two US schools were analysed. Both differences and similarities were revealed between boys' and girls' preferences and performance. Almost 60% of the boys preferred to write about science-related inventions, whereas girls' preferences were distributed among the different tasks. Content differences revealed a more practical perception of science among girls as opposed to a more imaginative one among boys. The boys wrote more formally and concisely whereas the girls produced longer written works, provided more detailed information and seemed to adapt better to the style demand of the different tasks. The quality of boys' and girls' writing, as reflected by the scope of the contents and the depth of treatment, was relatively poor. Boys and girls alike revealed curiosity concerning the heart and the brain, its structure and functioning, a desire to find a cure for cancer and AIDS, and a great concern for the environment. The integration of science and writing reflects a new perspective on gender differences in both science and writing, where the gap seems to be narrower than that typically found when science and writing are examined separately. Authentic writing examples are provided and implications for classroom practices aimed at enhancing communication skills and minimising gender-related difference in both science and writing are discussed.

show abstract

“…He found that students who wrote analytical essays learned more passage-specific content than those engaged in more restricted writing tasks that invited students to review information in a given text. A follow-up study based on these data (G. E. Newell & Winograd, 1989) showed that students who wrote analysis papers were more sensitive to structural importance-that is, to how important ideas in a prose passage related to one another-than those who answered study questions or took notes. There was also a significant effect for task on recall favoring those who wrote essays; for these students, an understanding of structural importance apparently "facilitated their ability to recall the gist" (p. 207).…”

Section: Literacy As Learning Literacy As Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding the Constructivist Metaphor: A Rhetorical Perspective on Literacy Research and Practice

Greene

Ackerman

1995

Review of Educational Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this review we summarize some of the accomplishments and shortcomings of constructivist accounts of reading and writing activity as part of our argument for social and textual views of literacy. Arguing that reading and writing are inseparable from each other and from other modes of meaning making, we aim to fore ground studies and theories that depict the rhetorical dimensions of literacy. We define rhetorical as referring to the means and circumstances through which readers and writers represent and negotiate texts, tasks, and social contexts. A rhetorical perspective on literacy research and practice calls attention to the ways in which language use crystallizes relations between readers and writers. Such a perspective also brings into focus the extent to which the ways authors position themselves within a certain social space is contingent upon (a) authority (e.g., a disciplinary community's conventions for inquiry, the institution of school, or a writer's expertise). (b) the purposes that bring writers together within a particular social forum, and (c) the topic of their discourse or task at hand. In trying to expand the constructivist metaphor, we intend to contribute to a conceptual vocabulary and imagery for literacy research and practice that draw upon textual and intersubjective explanations of constructive activity in composing.

show abstract

The Effects of Writing on Learning from Expository Text

Cited by 48 publications

References 12 publications

Dialogic writing as a tool for thinking and learning about the environment

Dialogic writing as a tool for thinking and learning about the environment

Informal Science Writing Produced by Boys and Girls: writing preference and quality

Expanding the Constructivist Metaphor: A Rhetorical Perspective on Literacy Research and Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About