The goal of the federally-funded Reading First program is to ensure that all students read well by the end of third grade (Georgia Department of Education, 2006). However, Reading First makes few (if any) provisions for writing in its required 135-minute reading block for literacy instruction. Is it possible to teach reading effectively to young children without involving them in writing? The purpose of this naturalistic study was to investigate how the Reading First framework affected the teaching of writing in primary classrooms in one elementary school that received Reading First funding for three years. Using a social constructivist theoretical lens, the researcher explored these issues in the context of a professional learning community—a voluntary teacher study group—focused on writing instruction. Guiding questions were (1) What are primary teachers’ perceptions of the reading-writing connection for students in kindergarten through third grade? (2) How does the context of a school wide Reading First grant affect primary teachers’ perceptions of the reading-writing connection for students in K-3? (3) In what ways does a voluntary teacher study group focused on the reading-writing connection influence primary teachers’ perceptions of the reading-writing connection and their literacy instruction? Fifteen primary teachers participated in the study during a six-month period. Data sources included an open-ended questionnaire, three in-depth interviews with each participant, audiotapes and selective transcription from ten teacher study group sessions, field notes from observations in 12 of the 15 participants’ classrooms, a final focus group interview, and a researcher’s journal. Data were analyzed inductively using the constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Trustworthiness and rigor were established through methods that ensure credibility, confirmability, dependability, and transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Findings revealed that the teachers viewed reading and writing as connected processes in literacy instruction. Although the Reading First parameters made them fearful of engaging children in writing during the 135-minute reading block, the teacher study group validated their beliefs and knowledge and empowered them to interweave limited writing activities across the curriculum. Overall, the Reading First requirements prevented teachers from involving children in extensive writing process instruction and writing workshop.

L'écriture de textes qui suscitent des émotions est une situation d'énonciation particulière. Celle-ci implique l'investissement de l'énonciateur dans son discours et renforce les liens que noue le sujet avec : le monde, qui est source d'émotion ; l'interlocuteur, qu'il faut émouvoir ; l'énoncé, qui doit contenir et / ou transmettre l'émotion. S'inscrivant dans un cadre théorique multiréférencé (psychologie, linguistique et didactique), notre travail repose sur l'hypothèse didactique que l'investissement énonciatif et subjectif, nécessaire pour écrire un texte qui suscite des émotions, permet d'infléchir l'investissement dans l'écriture des apprenants. Pour vérifier cette hypothèse, nous avons mis en place une expérimentation didactique, auprès de lycéennes de série technologique, pendant une année scolaire. Nous avons évalué les effets de cette expérimentation en comparant deux types de données recueillies dans cette classe et une autre classe, dite classe témoin : des productions d'élèves, afin d'analyser les indices de l'implication énonciative et subjective, et des questionnaires, afin d'observer l'évolution du rapport à l'écriture des élèves. À l'issue de l'expérimentation, les résultats obtenus montrent que les élèves de la classe expérimentale s'investissent davantage dans l'écriture. Du point de vue énonciatif, ces élèves expriment davantage leur subjectivité et utilisent des outils linguistiques, marquant leur investissement, plus variés que ceux de la classe témoin. Du point de vue du rapport à l'écriture, les discours produits par ces mêmes élèves contiennent des traces d'un investissement plus fort que ceux de l'autre classe. / Text writing giving rise to emotions is a specific situation of enunciation. This involves the investment of the writer in his discourse and strengthens the connections that the subject establishes with: the world, which is a source of emotion, the interlocutor, who must be affected, the statement, which must contain and / or communicate the emotion. As part of a multireference theoretical framework (psychology, linguistics and didactic), our work is based on the didactic assumption that enunciative and subjective investment needed to write a text raising emotions can influence the investment in writing of the students. To test this hypothesis, we have implemented a didactic experiment using high school technology students during an academic year. We evaluated the effects of this experiment by comparing two types of data collected in this class and in a control class. Data were composed of productions of students, to analyze indexes related to the enunciative and subjective involvement, and questionnaires, to observe the evolution of the writing connection of students. At the end of the experimentation, results showed that students from the experimental class were more invested in writing than students from the control class. From an enunciation perspective, these students expressed better their subjectivity and used linguistic tools, marking their investment, more varied than those of the control class. From a writing connection perspective, discourse produced by these same students contained traces of a stronger investment than those of the control class.

The purpose of this research was to conduct case studies to explore and describe Thai university students' awareness and application of cognitive and metacognitive strategies when reading and writing in English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL). Four participants, including two high and two low English language proficiency learners, were selected from 14 students enrolled in a five-week course called English for Social Sciences offered at Kasetsart University in Bangkok, Thailand in 2005. The major sources of data for the analyses included the transcripts of the participants' pair discussions, think-aloud protocols, interviews, and daily journal entries. In addition, field work observations, reading and writing strategy checklists, participants' written work, and the comparison of the pretest and posttest results were also instrumental to the analyses. The interpretive approach of content analysis was employed for these four case studies. Findings were initially derived from the single-case analyses, and then from cross-case analyses. Major findings revealed that strategic knowledge enhanced these English-as-a-foreign- language (EFL) learners' proficiency in English reading and writing. However, applying elaborative strategies for higher-level reading was challenging for most of the participants. Two crucial factors that impeded their development were the learners' uncertain procedural and conditional knowledge of strategy uses and their limited English language proficiency due to limited exposure to the second language (L2). The teacher's explanations and modeling of strategies, the participants' opportunities to discuss strategy use with peers, and extensive practice positively enhanced their development. Additionally, the learners' schema and knowledge of text structures played significant roles in their development of the two skills. These English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) learners also developed metacognitive awareness and strategy applications, but not to the level that always enhanced effective regulation and control of their reading and writing behaviors. Combining reading and writing in English-as-a-foreign-language (EFL) instruction promoted the learners' awareness of the relationships of certain strategies for the two skills, and developed their literacy skills holistically.