This study had two objectives: (1) to test the appropriateness of an existing instrument for attitude measurement with Oregon postsecondary writing teachers, and (2) to discover formative influences thus identified. Data were obtained by a questionnaire composed of the Scales for Measuring Teacher Attitudes toward Instruction in Written Composition (Schuessler et al., 1981), and additional original questions on training, demographics, and experience. The questionnaire was mailed to 122 composition teachers at 3 Oregon universities and 2 Oregon community colleges. Response rate was 80%. Additional information was provided by 6 respondents who participated in follow-up interviews. Factor analysis of scale item results neither replicated the attitude scales of previous research with this instrument nor produced meaningful new scales. The scales were thus judged inappropriate for attitude measurement with this sample. ANOVA did show associations between combined categories of independent variables (training, experience, and demographic traits) and attitude statements as dependent variables. Specifically, teacher characteristics of part-time employment, under 7 years experience, non Ph.D., and strong influence of a teaching assistantship were associated with prescriptive, content-centered attitude statement responses. The interviews suggested a need for refinement in attitude measurement devices to include items on teachers as writers, current teaching methodologies, and blending student- and content-centered instruction. In addition, the interview findings suggested patterns of influence on attitude for further study. Among these are institution of employment, status of employment, training, and teachers' own uses of writing.

No description available.

Like other social institutions, universities have been created and administered by and for a white-male dominant culture that continues to marginalize women and anyone else designated as -Other- according to race, class, ethnicity, ability, age, size, and sexuality. This discussion questions the dominant model of standard written discourse in the college English classroom where linear, abstract argument centered on autonomous thinking and reasoning prevails. It explores how such a discourse privileges a patriarchal system of education that subordinates other ways of learning and writing, particularly those that may be closely associated with contemporary women's learning, and it looks at some experimental writing strategies for teachers and students who want to challenge the dominant model of discourse within the institution and perhaps better enable students to write with a sense of their own goals and purposes. / Graduation date: 1994

Not available / text

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

Cheung Wai-jee. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 152-159). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / ABSTRACT (English version) --- p.i / ABSTRACT (Chinese version) --- p.ii / ACKNOWLEGEMENTS --- p.iii / TABLE OF CONTENTS --- p.iv / LIST OF TABLES --- p.ix / LIST OF FIGUERS --- p.x / Chapter CHAPTER 1 - --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Chapter 1.1 --- Overview --- p.1 / Chapter 1.2 --- Background of process writing and pedagogical approaches to writing in Hong Kong --- p.1 / Chapter 1.3 --- A deficit? --- p.4 / Chapter 1.4 --- Rationale and significance of the study --- p.4 / Chapter 1.5 --- Overall objective of the study and research questions --- p.5 / Chapter 1.6 --- Organisation of the thesis --- p.6 / Chapter CHAPTER 2 - --- LITERATURE REVIEW --- p.9 / Chapter 2.1 --- Overview --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2 --- Review of ESL/EFL writing research --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2.1 --- Early ESL/ EFL writing research in NES context --- p.9 / Chapter 2.2.1.1 --- Audio-lingual method --- p.10 / Chapter 2.2.1.2 --- Controlled writing --- p.11 / Chapter 2.2.1.3 --- Guided writing --- p.11 / Chapter 2.2.1.4 --- Product-based approach --- p.12 / Chapter 2.2.2 --- A paradigm shift? --- p.13 / Chapter 2.2.3 --- The process writing movement and its implementation in ESL/EFL writing classrooms --- p.15 / Chapter 2.2.3.1 --- The process writing movement --- p.15 / Chapter 2.2.3.2 --- Process writing in ESL/EFL writing classrooms --- p.16 / Chapter 2.3 --- Current research trends in ESL/EFL writing research field --- p.18 / Chapter 2.3.1 --- The case-study research approach --- p.18 / Chapter 2.3.2 --- The social nature of writing --- p.20 / Chapter 2.3.3 --- Ethnographic research and composing processes --- p.20 / Chapter 2.4 --- How the development of ESL/EFL writing research influences the present study --- p.22 / Chapter 2.4.1 --- The social-interactive nature of writing --- p.22 / Chapter 2.4.2 --- A false dichotomy between product-and process-oriented research --- p.23 / Chapter 2.4.2.1 --- Continuous recursiveness of process toward a content- oriented perspective --- p.25 / Chapter 2.4.2.2 --- Learner-centered writing pedagogy --- p.26 / Chapter 2.5 --- Review of writing pedagogies in Hong Kong secondary school context --- p.27 / Chapter 2.5.1 --- Teaching writing in typical Hong Kong classrooms --- p.27 / Chapter 2.5.2 --- Implementation of process writing in Hong Kong context --- p.29 / Chapter 2.6 --- Research gaps --- p.31 / Chapter 2.6.1 --- The influence of students' self-perceptions of language proficiency on their writing abilities --- p.31 / Chapter 2.6.2 --- The influences of different writing contexts on students' composing processes --- p.33 / Chapter 2.7 --- Chapter summary --- p.35 / Chapter CHAPTER 3 - --- METHODOLOGY --- p.37 / Chapter 3.1 --- Overview --- p.37 / Chapter 3.1.1 --- Orientation --- p.37 / Chapter 3.1.2 --- Caveat --- p.37 / Chapter 3 2 --- Review of ethnographic research approach --- p.38 / Chapter 3.2.1 --- Defining It as a descriptive research approach --- p.38 / Chapter 3.2.2 --- Origins of ethnography in anthropology --- p.40 / Chapter 3.2.3 --- Evolution of educational ethnographic research --- p.41 / Chapter 3.2.4 --- The move to ethnographic approach in writing research --- p.43 / Chapter 3.2.5 --- Summary --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3 --- Overall research design of the study and research questions --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3.1 --- Research design of the present study --- p.45 / Chapter 3.3.2 --- Research questions --- p.46 / Chapter 3.4 --- Some design considerations of interpretive way of inquiry --- p.47 / Chapter 3.4.1 --- Cultural elements --- p.47 / Chapter 3.4.2 --- Naturalistic setting --- p.48 / Chapter 3.4.3 --- Role of the researcher --- p.49 / Chapter 3.4.4 --- Subjectivity versus objectivity --- p.50 / Chapter 3.5 --- Selection of subjects for the study --- p.51 / Chapter 3.5.1 --- Description of subjects --- p.51 / Chapter 3.5.2 --- Why these two student writers? --- p.53 / Chapter 3.6 --- Procedures of the study and data collection --- p.53 / Chapter 3.6.1 --- Procedures of the study --- p.53 / Chapter 3.6.2 --- Data collection --- p.55 / Chapter 3.6.3 --- Justifications of research instruments used in the study --- p.59 / Chapter 3.6.3.1 --- Questionnaire --- p.59 / Chapter 3.6.3.2 --- Semi-structured interviewing --- p.59 / Chapter 3.6.3.3 --- Journal keeping --- p.60 / Chapter 3.7 --- Data Analysis --- p.61 / Chapter CHAPTER 4 - --- DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDENT WRITERS: PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES --- p.62 / Chapter 4.1 --- Overview --- p.62 / Chapter 4.2 --- Agnes: Description of a high-investment student writer --- p.63 / Chapter 4.2.1 --- Agnes's writing experience in her school --- p.63 / Chapter 4.2.2 --- Agnes's perception regarding writing experience in school --- p.67 / Chapter 4.2.3 --- Agnes's perception regarding her writing ability --- p.68 / Chapter 4.2.4 --- Agnes's expectation regarding English writing --- p.73 / Chapter 4.3 --- Starberry: Description of a low-investment student writer --- p.75 / Chapter 4.3.1 --- Starberry's writing experience in her school --- p.75 / Chapter 4.3.2 --- Starberry's perception regarding writing experience in school --- p.82 / Chapter 4.3.3 --- Starberry's perception regarding her writing ability --- p.84 / Chapter 4.3.4 --- Starberry's expectation regarding English writing --- p.87 / Chapter 4.4 --- Chapter summary --- p.89 / Chapter CHAPTER 5- --- ANALYSIS OF THE STUDENT WRITERS' COMPOSING PROCESSES: THE STUDENTS' WRITTEN TEXTS --- p.90 / Chapter 5.1 --- Overview --- p.90 / Chapter 5.2 --- Description of the composing processes of Agnes --- p.91 / Chapter 5.2.1 --- Choosing the writing topic --- p.92 / Chapter 5.2.2 --- Searching for relevant materials and getting started to write --- p.95 / Chapter 5.2.3 --- Composing the essay --- p.98 / Chapter 5.2.4 --- Revising and evaluating the task --- p.101 / Chapter 5.3 --- Description of the composing processes of Starberry --- p.104 / Chapter 5.3.1 --- Choosing the writing topic --- p.106 / Chapter 5.3.2 --- Searching for relevant materials and getting started to write --- p.107 / Chapter 5.3.3 --- Composing the essay --- p.109 / Chapter 5.3.4 --- Revising and evaluating the task --- p.110 / Chapter 5.4 --- Chapter summary --- p.112 / Chapter CHAPTER 6 - --- ANALYSIS OF THE WRITING CONTEXTS AND THEIR INFLUENCES ON THE COMPOSING PROCESSES --- p.114 / Chapter 6.1 --- Overview --- p.114 / Chapter 6.2 --- Orientation of writing context and its relationship with composing processes --- p.115 / Chapter 6.3 --- A general description of the school writing context and its influences on students' composing processes --- p.116 / Chapter 6.3.1 --- Overview --- p.116 / Chapter 6.3.2 --- Institutional variables and concerns of teacher and student in a typical Hong Kong secondary writing classroom --- p.117 / Chapter 6.3.3 --- Individual perceptions of classroom environment on the composing processes --- p.120 / Chapter 6.3.4 --- A rush hour: Influence of time limit on the composing processes --- p.122 / Chapter 6.3.5 --- Approaches for writing in school --- p.124 / Chapter 6.3.6 --- Teacher intervention as a part of the writing environment --- p.125 / Chapter 6.4 --- A general description of the home writing context and its influences on students' composing processes --- p.129 / Chapter 6.4.1 --- Overview --- p.129 / Chapter 6.4.2 --- Individual perceptions of home environment on the composing processes --- p.130 / Chapter 6.4.3 --- A relaxing moment: Influence of time autonomy on the composing processes --- p.132 / Chapter 6.4.4 --- Approaches for writing at home --- p.134 / Chapter 6.4.5 --- Teacher-as-collaborator in the writing environment --- p.135 / Chapter 6.5 --- Students' interpretations of an ideal writing context --- p.137 / Chapter 6.6 --- Chapter summary --- p.138 / Chapter CHAPTER 7- --- CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS --- p.139 / Chapter 7.1 --- Summary of findings --- p.139 / Chapter 7.1.1 --- Product writing dominates the school writing context --- p.141 / Chapter 7.1.2 --- Teacher intervention in the composing processes --- p.143 / Chapter 7.1.3 --- Lack of process writing elements introduced --- p.146 / Chapter 7.2 --- Pedagogical implications --- p.147 / Chapter 7.2.1 --- Implications for student writers --- p.148 / Chapter 7.2.2 --- Implications for writing teachers --- p.148 / Chapter 7.3 --- Recommendations for further research --- p.150 / REFERENCES --- p.152 / APPENDICES --- p.160 / Appendix A. Overview of Native English Speaker (NES) Writing Research --- p.160 / Appendix B. Parental Informed Consent Letter --- p.171 / Appendix C. Teacher Consent Letter --- p.172 / "Appendix D. Communication Triangle: A Dynamic Relationship among Writer, Reader and Subject" --- p.173 / Appendix E. Aims and Purposes of Writing --- p.174 / Appendix F. Expressive Aim Writing: An Overview --- p.176 / Appendix G. Home Writing Task 1: Personal Experience --- p.186 / Appendix H. Home Writing Task 2: People --- p.188 / Appendix I. Review Sheets --- p.189 / Appendix J. Background Questionnaire --- p.193 / Appendix K. Pre-study Interview --- p.199 / Appendix L. Teacher Interview --- p.200 / Appendix M. Teacher Interview Questions --- p.201 / Appendix N. Academic-history Interview --- p.202 / Appendix O. Keeping a Writing Journal --- p.203 / Appendix P. Student Writing Portfolio (Content Sample) --- p.207 / Appendix Q. Two Students' Written Texts and Notes --- p.208 / Appendix R. Two Students' Journal Entries --- p.274 / Appendix S. Two Students' Retrospective Reports --- p.314 / Appendix T. Transcripts of Interviews --- p.320

published_or_final_version / Education / Master / Master of Education

College composition students and graduate assistant teachers were tested for their perceptions of coherence, focus, organization, and overall quality of essays written in the Japanese Ki-Sho-Ten-Ketsu rhetorical pattern of organization as opposed to the English Five Part Essay style of organization where the experimental essays were otherwise identical. These perceptions were measured on a 4-point Lykert scale. The composition students were also tested for their total recall of the essays. The data were analyzed by ANOVA, and no significant effect for treatment was observed. The results of this study suggest that for the Japanese Ki-Sho-Ten-Ketsu/English Five Part Essay pair the negative effects of native language rhetorical pattern on readers of the second language may be less important than the theory of contrastive rhetoric would suggest. Consequently, alternative forms of possible cultural interference such as cultural background knowledge (content) and the role played by writing in a culture warrant greater scrutiny.