Syftet med fallstudien är att bidra med didaktisk förståelse för relationerna mellan skrivande och andra former av kommunikation, liksom för sådana faktorer som möjliggör och/eller hindrar yngre elevers gemensamma textskapande i klassrummet. Forskningsfrågorna berör hur dialogiskt parskrivande tar form, när tre elevpar planerar och parskriver en berättelse samt hur de stödstrukturer som erbjuds fungerar för dessa elever. Elevernas samtal om texterna och textkonstruktionerna förstås i studien som beroende av de sammanhang med lärare, elever och aktiviteter i vilka de uppstår. Resultatet visar att berättelseskrivande är en komplex och mödosam process för de unga eleverna. Komplexiteten består i att hantera skrivandet utifrån att beskriva ett händelseförlopp och att samtidigt förhålla sig till sådant som att ljuda och skriva/konstruera en mening, verbalt och på digital skrivplatta. Resultatet belyser att elevernas dialoger innebär ett verbaliserande av textskapandet. Under parskrivandet synliggörs skrivprocessen såväl som berättelseskrivandets kreativa möjligheter. Elevdialogerna visar att eleverna förhandlar om – vad de ska skriva om, och hur detta ska konstrueras/transformeras skriftligt. I förhandlingarna strävar eleverna efter ömsesidighet i beslutsfattandet. Eleverna använder förutom samtal även andra semiotiska resurser, såsom sång och simultant tal, vilket visar på engagemang i textskapandet. Eleverna visar också engagemang genom att fantisera om och agera ut berättelsen muntligt på sätt som liknar barns lek, vilket leder till att den verbala berättelsen blir större än den skriftliga. Övergripande visade sig parskrivandet, inramat av lärarens instruktioner och intervenerande i skrivaktiviteterna, stötta elevernas berättelseskrivande. Eleverna stöttade varandra med sådant som att generera idéer, komma ihåg idéer, behandla berättelsens övergripande struktur samt ljudande, stavning och meningsbyggnad. Elevdialogerna visade även exempel på spänningar och motstånd och då i samtalen om innehåll och textkonstruktioner. Den slutsats som kan dras av detta är att lärare behöver ställa frågor som kan ge dem ledtrådar till hur spänningarna mellan eleverna har uppstått, för att få guidning i hur elevernas samtal och skrivande kan stöttas. / This case study examines eight-year-old students’ talk about storytelling within a Swedish primary school classroom and the subsequent meaning-making that they engage in. The study aims to establish a pedagogical understanding of the relationships between writing and other forms of communication and identify enabling and/or hindering factors in writing classes that include younger students. The research questions interrogate how dialogic co-writing develops when three students plan and co-write a story. Furthermore, the study address how the offered scaffolding functioned for these students. In terms of theory, the study draws on New Literacy Studies and dialogical learning. Students’ talk about text and text constructions are taken as situated within a social practice that is constituted by the context of teachers, students, and the enacted activities. The study is informed by action research which, among other things, entails that the lessons that were observed for this study were planned in collaboration with two teachers and the teacher-researcher. The empirical data consists of video recordings, audio recordings, photographs, and field notes. The writing activities were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, primarily with reference to transcriptions of the students’ dialogues which concerned the students’ planning and writing on digital writing pads. The results of this study reveal that story writing is a complex and demanding process for young students. The complexity consists of dealing with the act of writing in terms of describing the plot whilst simultaneously relating language sounds to letters and constructing sentences. Also, results show, that the students’ dialogues implied a verbalization of the students’ text-making. During the co-writing activity, the writing process and the creative possibilities of story writing were made visible. Furthermore, the students’ dialogues demonstrate that their collaboration was carried out through negotiations concerning What? and How? they might write and how the results of these negotiations should be transformed into text. During these negotiations, the students strove to achieve a sense of reciprocity with regards to their decisions. While negotiating, the students also used semiotic resources in addition to talk, including singing and simultaneous speech, thus revealing writing engagement. The students also showed engagement by fantasising and acting the story out verbally similar to children’s play. Consequently, this made the verbal story wider than the written one. Overall, when framed by the teacher’s instruction and intervention during the writing activities, the paired writing activities lent support to the students’ story writing. Moreover, the students supported each other in contexts where they were tasked to generate ideas, remember ideas, develop the story's overall structure, and address issues related to phonics, spelling, and sentence construction. The students’ dialogues also contained examples of tension and resistance in their interactions that dealt with the story content and text construction. One conclusion is that teachers should ask questions that can provide them with clues to the basis for the tensions and thereby guide the teacher in how to scaffold their student’s interaction and writing.

Denna uppsats handlar om hur digitala verktyg praktiskt kan implementeras under skrivprocessen vid undervisning av hur man skriver en argumenterande text. Vidare har studien även som avsikt att ta reda på elevernas åsikter kring att använda digitala verktyg under skrivprocessen. För att uppnå detta syfte genomfördes en designbaserad aktionsstudie som bestod av en intervention där en lektionsserie på sju lektioner observerades samt efterföljande fokusgruppsintervjuer med de 14 deltagande eleverna. De digitala verktyg som interventionen ämnade att testa var Mural, PowerPoint och ChatGPT. Resultatet utifrån observationen av interventionen och intervjuerna tyder på att digitala verktyg kan användas som stöd under skrivprocessen men att eleverna behöver mer övning, mer tid och tydligare instruktioner. Detta gäller framförallt vid användandet av digitala verktyg som är nya för eleverna. Även tekniska strul är något som studiens resultat visar är något som lärare bör ha i åtanke vid användning av digitala verktyg vid processorienterad skrivundervisning. Överlag indikerar resultatet av studien att lärare bör inkludera digitala verktyg vid processorienterad skrivundervisning men att mer tid och kunskap krävs för att kunna implementera dem på bästa sätt. / This essay is about how digital tools practically can be implemented during the writing process when teaching how to write argumentative texts. Furthermore, the study also has the intention to find out the students’ opinions about using digital tools during the writing process. In order to achieve this aim a design based action research study, that consisted of an intervention where seven lessons was observed and follow up focus group interviews with the 14 participating students, was conducted. The digitals tools that the intervention aimed to test were Mural, PowerPoint and ChatGPT. The results based on the observation of the intervention and the interviews indicate that digital tools can be used as support during the writing process, but that the students need more practice, more time and clearer instructions. This especially applies when digital tools that are new to the students are being used. Technical issues are also something that the result of this study shows is something that teachers should keep in mind when using digital tools to teach writing. Overall, the study’s result indicates that teachers should include digital tools when teaching writing in a process-oriented manner but that more time and knowledge is needed to implement them in the best way.

From the minute a student walks into her first day of kindergarten, she is learning to read and write. Reading and writing are reciprocal in nature, using the same composing processes (Roe, Smith, & Kolodziej, 2019). Interchangeable thinking skills are essential for both reading and writing, such as analyzing, identifying, inferencing, evaluating, and comparing (Roe, Smith, & Koldziej, 2019). Published research over time suggested that instruction focused on teaching students the craft and mechanics of writing significantly contributed to the overall improvement across the spectrum of literacy development (Cutler, 2015;Raphael, 2019; Wright, 2016). However, studies also suggested that teachers of all grade levels tend to vary in their approach to teaching writing (Newmark, B., Speck, D., Amesbury, E., Lough, C., Belgutay, J., Lowe, J., … Hepburn, H, 2018). This study was focused on understanding how two elementary level teachers interpreted writing curriculum and carried out instruction in their respective classrooms. Qualitative methodological procedures were employed through interviewing both educators and observing their writing instruction. The collected data was analyzed through inductive thematic analysis and findings included: 1) both teachers believed that writing instruction matters; 2) both teachers followed the curriculum as they learned in teacher professional development; 3) writing instruction varied according to primary versus elementary contexts.

No description available.

Liebe Lehrende, Betreuer:innen und Tutor:innen, sei es in Form von Seminar-, Beleg- und Forschungsarbeiten oder einer großen Abschlussarbeit zum Ende des Studiums: „Wissenschaftliches Schreiben entscheidet wesentlich über Studienerfolg und wissenschaftliche Karriere“ (Kruse 2007, S. 9). Ob Studierende Schreibkompetenzen entwickeln oder nicht, hat über eine Note im Seminar hinaus nachhaltige Auswirkungen auf ihre Zukunft. Dies verweist geradewegs auf die hohe Relevanz der Schreibdidaktik an der Hochschule. In diesem Bereich hat sich in den letzten Jahrzehnten viel getan. Von deutschen Unis als „Wüsten der Schreiblehre“ (Wolfsberger S. 13) spricht heute keiner mehr. Neben einer Fülle an Literatur zum universitären Schreiben gibt es inzwischen an vielen Hochschulen Schreibzentren und in manchen Studiengängen wurden eigene Seminare zum wissenschaftlichen Schreiben etabliert. Gut so. Und doch: In einer Welt, in der Lehrsituationen perfekt auf das akademische Schreiben ausgerichtet sind, wäre unsere Broschüre vielleicht gar nicht nötig. Von diesem Zustand ist die deutsche Hochschullandschaft leider noch weit entfernt. Natürlich ist uns am Schreibzentrum der TUD bewusst, welche Herausforderung darin besteht, für eine schreibförderliche Lehre zu sorgen, während diese in Curricula nicht unbedingt vorgesehen ist. Gleichzeitig nehmen wir die Überforderung von Studierenden wahr, die vor ihren großen schriftlichen Arbeiten stehen, und bisher wenig Möglichkeit hatten, ihre Schreibkompetenzen auszubilden. In insgesamt fünf Modulen möchten wir daher mit Ihnen aus verschiedenen Perspektiven auf das studentische Schreiben an der Hochschule blicken und Ihre Rolle als Lehrperson darin in den Fokus setzen. Wir beginnen mit der Durchleuchtung wissenschaftlicher Schreibprozesse (Modul 1). Darauf folgt die (gute) Betreuung von Schreibaufgaben, etwa die effektive Kommunikation von Schreibaufträgen oder die Besonderheiten, die in der Betreuung langfristiger Schreibaufgaben bestehen (Modul 2). In den beiden folgenden Modulen gehen wir auf fachgebundene Spezifika der Schreibdidaktik (Modul 3) bzw. die Zielgruppe der internationalen Studierenden (Modul 4) ein. Abschließend fokussieren wir die Frage, wie sich die Ausbildung von Schreibkompetenzen der Studiereden konkret im Semesterverlauf unterstützen lässt (Modul 5). Die Broschüre bietet Ihnen die Möglichkeit, Ihre bisherige Vorgehensweise in der Lehre zu reflektieren, um diese schreibförderlicher zu gestalten. Wichtig war uns dabei ein starker Praxisbezug, weshalb Sie zu jedem der Themen konkrete Methoden oder Checklisten mit didaktischer Rahmung und Anleitung finden. Darüber hinaus haben wir viele nützliche Übungen zusammengestellt, die Sie an Ihre Studierenden weitergeben können, sowie Materialien, die speziell für Ihre Rolle als Begleiter:in studentischer Schreibprozesse gedacht sind. Best-Practice-Beispiele von Lehrenden runden die Broschüre mit authentischen Einblicken in unterschiedliche schreibdidaktische Herangehensweisen ab. Die Starthilfe Schreibdidaktik gibt es als Print- und Digitalversion auf der Website des Schreibzentrums.:1 Wissenschaftliches Schreiben und was sich dahinter verbirgt 9 Der Weg zur Kompetenzentwicklung 10 Über die Vielseitigkeit wissenschaftlicher Texte 15 Erwartungen und Anforderungen an studentische Schreibprojekte 20 Wie Schreibprozessmodelle bei der Betreuung von Schreibaufgaben helfen 23 Zum Einsatz von KI im Schreibprozess 28 Zeitplanung für Lehrende 33 2 Gute Betreuung von Schreibaufgaben und was dafür wichtig ist 42 Prüfungsleistungen konkrete Schreibaufgaben zuordnen 43 Bewertungsprozesse und Bewertungskriterien erarbeiten 45 Anleitung zum Erstellen eines Leitfadens für Studierende 58 Checkliste für Konsultationsgespräche und den Betreuungsprozess 61 Feedback geben und geben lassen 66 Wenn es mal nicht so läuft, wie geplant: Kollegiale Fallberatung 75 3 Fachspezifische Schreibdidaktik und wie sie Studierenden langfristig nützt 79 Anforderungen an spezifische Textsorten kommunizieren 81 Berufsbezogenes Schreiben 91 MINT-Studierende beim Schreiben anleiten 97 4 Internationale Studierende und wie man Missverständnissen vorbeugt 99 Die eigene Wissenschaftskultur reflektieren 100 Die eigene Kommunikationskultur reflektieren 103 Internationale Studierende anleiten – ein Leitfaden 106  5 Fragen Studierender im Schreibprozess und wie man darauf antwortet 111 Im Semester Schreibkompetenzen vermitteln 112 Nützliche Methoden für oft gestellte Fragen 119 Methodenanhang 123 Bibliografie 173 Weitere Anlaufstellen 179

The overall purpose of this study is to examine how students and teachers state that they view the use of digital writing tools during the first years of school. Is the use seen as training the ability to use them operationally, what I in this work call goals, or are they seen as a tool to change, improve or simplify the writing process, what I call meaning? By using an interview method where students and teachers talk about the use of digital writing tools in groups, pairs or individually, I try to investigate what opportunities, positive aspects, limitations and negative aspects they state when it comes to digital writing tools. I also intend to investigate whether this can be linked to the view of digital writing tools as meaning or goal.   The teaching of reading and writing during the first years of school is influenced by both teachers' and pupils' thoughts regarding language and learning. How we view the ability to read and write and how best to learn it affects how we organize and think about the teaching we do. This work focuses on digital writing, which I define as writing that is mediated by digital tools. In this work, I use two different approaches to investigate digital writing. Hyland (2020), which is based on the concepts of product-, process- and reader-focused, and Merchant (2008), which argues that digital competence is either seen as a set of skills, as a tool for learning, or as an opportunity for transformation of subjects' representational possibilities. By applying these approaches to the concepts of meaning and goal, I get a model to start from in the abductive approach I use when I conduct a thematic analysis of the results my interviews generated.  Most students are positive about typing digitally but mention that they find it difficult to use the keyboard. The teachers also have an overall positive attitude but mention technical problems, such as logging in and connecting, as negative aspects. Both teachers and students express that the use of digital writing tools is seen as training the ability to use them (goal). Using the digital tools to improve, change and simplify the writing process (meaning) is mentioned to a greater extent by the teachers, even though the students express that it is easier to move, edit and change the text. The aspect that the digital writing tools increase social interaction is not mentioned at all by the students, but by several of the teachers.   Learning with digital tools is about being able to use them in appropriate ways. To be able to do this, both the operational skills and the knowledge of how digital resources can be used as tools for learning need to be in place.

La version intégrale de ce mémoire est disponible uniquement pour consultation individuelle à la Bibliothèque de musique de l’Université de Montréal (http://www.bib.umontreal.ca/MU). / La recherche propose une analyse des stratégies qui entrent en jeu dans la composition de musique mixte et la composition assistée par ordinateur. Elle met en relief les caractéristiques de trois écritures (instrumentale, électroacoustique et programmation informatique) afin de les postuler comme fondements de différentes approches musicales. Ces approches sont ensuite examinées en tant qu’entrées possibles dans un projet, démarches impliquant un statut spécifique du compositeur, et caractéristiques qui résultent de leur interaction, afin de former l’ensemble des stratégies de composition. À travers la réalisation de projets musicaux, la recherche propose d’appliquer quatre stratégies différentes dans l’objectif d’explorer de nouvelles méthodologies. L’expérimentation a mis en évidence les facteurs conduisant au respect ou à la déviation des partis pris, et a ouvert la voie au questionnement de l’influence du « faire » sur « l’entendre ». / This research proposes an analysis of the strategies that come into play in the composition of mixed and computer-assisted musical works. It highlights the characteristics of three compositional practices (instrumental, electroacoustic, and computer programming) in order to represent them as the foundation of different musical approaches. These approaches are then analyzed as possible starting points for a project, as processes implying a particular status of the composer and characteristics which result from their interaction, in order to form the entirety of compositional strategies. Through the realization of musical projects, the research proposes to apply four different strategies with the goal of exploring new methodologies. This experimentation has demonstrated the factors leading to the respect for or the deviation from biases and has opened the way to the questioning of the influence of the “doing” on the “hearing”.

Dans les dernières décennies, le présumé déclin de la compétence scripturale des élèves québécois a soulevé les passions. Force est d’admettre que leurs compétences sont lacunaires : tant les rapports du ministère de l’Éducation (Jalbert, 2006; Ouellet, 1984) que les études scientifiques ou gouvernementales (Bureau, 1985; Groupe DIEPE, 1995; Roberge, 1984) révèlent leur incapacité à s’approprier l’écriture. Les TIC pourraient bien faire partie de la solution : on sait pertinemment qu’elles favorisent la réussite scolaire dans certains contextes (Barayktar, 2001; Christmann & Badgett, 2003; Waxman, Lin, & Michko, 2003). Toutefois, modifient-elles le processus scriptural au point d’en faciliter l’apprentissage? Cette question constitue le cœur de l’actuel projet de recherche. Les modèles du processus d’écriture comme celui de Hayes et Flower (Flower & Hayes, 1981; Hayes, 1995; Hayes & Flower, 1980) rappellent que les TIC font partie du contexte de production; à ce titre, elles influencent autant la qualité des textes que les processus cognitifs et la motivation. Elles libèrent notamment des ressources cognitives, puisqu’elles prennent en charge certaines opérations, comme la calligraphie (Daiute, 1983). Partant, le scripteur peut se concentrer davantage sur des tâches plus complexes. Des méta-analyses (Bangert-Drowns, 1993; Goldberg, Russell, & Cook, 2003) attestent que le traitement de texte exerce un effet minime, mais statistiquement significatif sur la qualité de l’écriture. Toutefois, il est associé à des révisions en surface (Faigley & Witte, 1981; Figueredo & Varnhagen, 2006). Rares sont les projets de recherche qui explorent simultanément l’impact du traitement de texte sur plusieurs dimensions du processus scriptural; plus rares encore sont les travaux qui se sont intéressés à ce sujet depuis les années 1990. Pour pallier ce manque, cette thèse de doctorat vise à 1) mesurer l’effet des TIC sur la qualité de l’écriture; 2) décrire l’impact des TIC sur les processus cognitifs de révision et de traduction; 3) mesurer l’impact des TIC sur la motivation à écrire. Pour y arriver, nous recourons à une méthodologie mixte. D’une part, un devis de recherche quasi expérimental nous permet de comparer les scripteurs technologiques aux scripteurs traditionnels; d’autre part, une approche qualitative nous laisse accéder aux pensées et aux perceptions des utilisateurs de l’ordinateur. Les trois articles qui constituent le cœur de cette thèse rapportent les résultats relatifs à chacun des objectifs spécifiques de recherche. Dans le premier texte, nous avons mesuré les effets du traitement de texte sur la compétence scripturale. L’analyse statistique des données colligées nous a permis de dégager une amélioration des performances, strictement en orthographe d’usage. En comparaison, les élèves du groupe témoin se sont améliorés davantage en cohérence textuelle et ont mieux performé en orthographe grammaticale. Le deuxième article propose de faire la lumière sur ces résultats. Nous y étudions donc l’impact des TIC sur le processus cognitif de révision. Ce volet, basé sur une approche qualitative, recourt largement à l’observation vidéographiée. Nous y mettons d’abord en évidence le grand nombre d’erreurs commises lors des séances d’écriture technologiques; nous faisons également ressortir la sous-utilisation du vérificateur linguistique, qui pose peu de diagnostics appropriés ou qui est souvent ignoré des scripteurs. Toutefois, malgré cette sous-utilisation du traitement de texte, des entrevues de groupe font état de perceptions positives à l’égard des TIC; on leur prête des vertus certaines et elles sont jugées motivantes. Ce phénomène constitue le cœur du dernier article, au cours duquel nous tâchons de mesurer l’impact du mode d’écriture sur la motivation à écrire. Nous menons ce volet dans une perspective quantitative. La motivation des participants a été mesurée avec une échelle de motivation. L’analyse statistique des données montre que les élèves technologiques sont motivés intrinsèquement par les technologies, tandis que leurs pairs du groupe témoin sont amotivés. Lors du chapitre conclusif, nous mettons ces résultats en relation, tentant d’expliquer globalement l’impact des TIC dans le processus scriptural. Au terme de notre thèse, nous formulons des recommandations destinées aux praticiens et aux décideurs engagés dans le système éducatif. / The supposed decline of writing skills in Quebecois students’ during the last decades has raised vigorous debates. Admittedly, their competencies show deficiencies. Indeed, reports by the Ministry of Education (Jalbert, 2006; Ouellet, 1984) and research, both scientific and governmental (Bureau, 1985; Groupe DIEPE, 1995; Roberge, 1984), reveal their incapacity to appropriate the writing process. ICT might well be part of the solution : it is a well-known fact that they encourage scholastic achievement in certain contexts (Barayktar, 2001; Christmann & Badgett, 2003; Waxman, et al., 2003). However, do they modify the writing process so as to facilitate its learning? This question is at the heart of the current research project. Writing process models, such as those of Hayes and Flower (1981; 1995; 1980), remind us that ICT are a part of the Context component; as such, they influence the quality of the texts as much as cognitive processes and motivation. They unburden the cognitive process by taking on certain functions such as calligraphy (Daiute, 1983). Consequently, the writer may concentrate on more complex tasks. Meta-analyses (Bangert-Drowns, 1993; Goldberg, et al., 2003) show that the use of word processors has a small yet statistically significant effect on the quality of writing. That being said, they are mainly linked to surface changes (Faigley & Witte, 1981; Figueredo & Varnhagen, 2006). Research projects that explore the impact of word processors on the writing process and its various dimensions simultaneously are rare, even more so since the last twenty years. To satisfy this research gap, the present thesis aims at 1) measuring ICT effect upon the quality of writing; 2) describe ICT impact on the cognitive processes of translating and reviewing; 3) measure ICT impact on motivation to write. To this objective, we utilize a mixed methodology. On one hand, a quasi-experimental design allows for a comparison of technological writers to traditional writers; on the other, a qualitative approach provides access to the thoughts and perceptions of computer users. The three articles that constitute the heart of this thesis relate the results pertaining to the stated research objectives. In the first text, we measured the effects of word processing on the quality of writing. The statistical analysis of the dataset allowed us to observe an improvement in spelling, but not grammatical spelling. In comparison, students of the control group showed improvements in their texts’ logical coherence and grammatical orthography. The second article intends to shed light on these results. The impact of ICT on the cognitive processes of translating and reviewing is studied to that effect. This aspect, which is based on a qualitative approach, is largely based on video observation. First, are highlighted the many errors committed when word processing is used. Then, is underlined the poor use of spell checking tools, that oftentimes provide inappropriate diagnostics or that are simply ignored by users. However, group interviews have shown positive perceptions vis-à-vis ICT, despite their poor use. Indeed, they are considered motivating and their benefits, although recognized, do not seem to have an impact. The motivating factor is at the heart of the last article, which measures the impact of writing methods on the motivation to write. A quantitative analysis is used to that effect. The participants’ motivation was measured using a motivational scale. The statistical analysis of the dataset demonstrates that technological students are intrinsically motivated by ICT, whereas their peers of the control group are amotivated. In the concluding chapter, we put theses results in relation with one another so as to explain the impact of ICT on the writing process as a whole. Lastly, we hope to provide possible recommendations to practitioners and decision makers within the educational system.

Följande didaktiska studie har syftet att undersöka gymnasieelevers uppfattningar om svensklärares återkoppling i skrivprocessen. Förhoppningen med syftet är att urskilja eventuella utvecklingsmöjligheter inom formativ bedömning och skrivundervisning för svensklärare. Undersökningen har genomförts genom individuella intervjuer och fokusgruppsintervjuer med gymnasieelever, samt genom en enkät som har besvarats av gymnasieelever. En lärstrategi inom formativ bedömning om att ge effektiv återkoppling för att gynna lärandet appliceras på resultatet. Utöver det didaktiska perspektivet tillämpas även ett sociokulturellt perspektiv på skrivprocessen och återkopplingen, samt en teori om tre olika roller som lärare anses kunna inta när de ger återkoppling (Anson 1989). Resultatet visar att elevernas uppfattningar varierar, men majoriteten anser att återkoppling är viktigt för den egna utvecklingen och för att bli motiverad till fortsatt lärande. Återkopplingen förväntas innehålla information om vad som var bra i texten, vad som kan utvecklas i texten, hur de kan gå tillväga för att utveckla det samt nivå eller betyg. Förarbetet är den del i skrivprocessen som de flesta elever uppfattar som svårast. I likhet med tidigare forskning visar även resultatet att eleverna mestadels får återkoppling vid bedömning av den färdiga texten, samt att de skulle vilja ha återkoppling tidigare och arbeta med den i undervisningen. De önskar dessutom att få mer konkreta förslag på hur de ska kunna utvecklas. Det sociokulturella perspektivet visar att skrivundervisningen och det sociala mötet med läraren påverkar skribentens skrivutveckling i form av undervisningsinnehåll och möjlighet till muntlig återkoppling. Det finns även exempel i materialet som talar för alla tre olika roller kring lärares återkoppling. Baserat på elevuppfattningarna, och för att utveckla svensklärares formativa återkoppling, är slutsatserna för uppsatsen att svensklärare bör integrera återkopplingen mer i undervisningen och under skrivprocessen. I återkopplingen behöver de även fortsätta ge, eller börja att ge konkreta förslag på hur eleven ska gå tillväga för att utvecklas. / The following didactic study aims to investigate senior high school students' perception of Swedish teachers' feedback in the writing process. My purpose is to distinguish possible opportunities for improvement in formative assessment and writing teaching for Swedish teachers. A survey has been conducted through individual and focus group interviews with high school students, as well as a questionnaire that has been answered by high school students. A learning strategy in formative assessment of providing effective feedback to promote learning is applied to the result. In addition to the didactic perspective, a socio-cultural perspective is also applied to the writing process and feedback, as well as a theory of three different roles that teachers are considered to take when giving feedback (Anson 1989).  My result shows that the students' perceptions vary, but the majority believes that feedback is important for their own development and for staying motivated to continue learning. The feedback is expected to contain information on what was good in the student’s text, what can be improved in it and how to go about achieving this improvement, as well as information about the student’s level or grade. The preliminary work is the part of the writing process that most students perceive as the most difficult. As with previous research, the result also shows that the students receive the most feedback when assessing the finished text, and that they would like to receive feedback earlier on as well and work with it throughout the teaching. They also want more concrete suggestions on how they can improve. The socio-cultural perspective shows that both the writing instruction and social interactions with the teacher affect the writer's writing development in the form of teaching content and the possibility of oral feedback. There are also examples in the material that speak for all three different roles regarding teacher feedback. My conclusion is that in order to develop Swedish teachers’ formative feedback, they should integrate the feedback more into their teaching and during the writing process based on the student’s perceptions. In the feedback they also need to begin or continue to give concrete suggestions on how the student should proceed in order to improve.

Syftet med examensarbetet är att undersöka läromedels upplägg och utformning. Undersökningen har även som syfte att öka förståelsen för vilka förmågor, centrala innehåll och kunskapskrav som läromedel förmedlar och inkluderar skrivövningar. Undersökningen består av en läromedelsanalys av fem läromedel i svenska avsedda för årskurs ett. Innehållet i läromedlen analyseras såväl kvalitativt som kvantitativt utifrån ett sociokulturellt perspektiv.  Det har utförts en kvalitativ och kvantitativ innehållsanalys av fem läromedel, där studien undersöker utifrån delar av kursplanens förmågor, centrala innehåll och kunskapskrav tillhörande skrivning. Det studeras vilka likheter och skillnader av läromedlens uppfyllelse av de valda analysvariablerna och faserna, men också likheter. I studien har det även försökt synliggöras vad läromedlen innehåller och hur de presenteras. Kvalitativt och kvantitativt har olika analysvariabler rörande skrivande av olika texttyper samt alfabet, alfabetisk ordning och bokstävers form utförts. Analysen visade ett resultat där läromedlen är uppbyggda på ett varierat sätt och fokuserar i varierande utsträckning på olika delar av analysvariablerna. Det är inte en självklarhet att läromedlen innehåller varje analysvariabel, utan det var endast tre av de fem utvalda läromedlen. Läromedlen har stora skillnader i variation av övningar och mängd övningar rörande uppfyllelse av kursplanens förmågor, centrala innehåll och kunskapskrav. / The purpose of the thesis is to investigate the study material and their structure. The study also increases the understanding of abilities, central content and knowledge requirements that the study material mediates, also including writing exercises. The study composes of a study material analysis of five materials used in Swedish education for children in grade one. The study materials content is analyzed both qualitative and quantitative from a sociocultural perspective.   A qualitative and quantitative subject analysis has been performed on five study materials, where the analysis investigates the study material from the aspects of syllabus's abilities, central content and knowledge requirements associated with writing. It investigates what the similarities are between the study materials' fulfillment of the chosen analysis variables and the phases, but also their similarities. In the study, it was also tried to make visible what the study materials contain and how they are presented. Qualitatively and quantitatively analyze got different analysis variables concerning the writing of different text types as well as the alphabet, alphabetical order and lettering form. The analyze showed a result where the teaching aids are structured in a varied way and focus on varying degrees in different parts of the analysis variables. It is not obvious that the study materials contain every variable, but there were only three of the five selected study material that clearly contained them. The study material has a big difference in the variety of exercises and the number of exercises concerning the fulfillment of the syllabus's abilities, central content and knowledge requirements.