This comparative pre-test/post-test quantitative study investigated the effect of an instructional strategy using concept mapping as a graphic organizer on the quality of persuasive writing compositions produced by fourth grade elementary school students. Six fourth grade classes were assigned as intact groups to three conditions: concept mapping treatment, four square treatment, and control. Participants wrote a pre-test essay prior to treatment. Treatment consisted of an instructional unit collaboratively developed by the researcher and classroom teachers on persuasive writing. Instruction for the three treatment groups was the same except for type of graphic organizer used (Concept Map, Four Square, or none). Following treatment, a post-test on persuasive writing was administered in the form of an essay. The concept mapping treatment group used concept mapping as their graphic organizer, the four square treatment group used the four square method, and the control group used no graphic organizer. Each of the pre- and post-test essays for both treatment and control groups were scored using rubrics created collaboratively by the researcher and participating teachers for Persuasive Content and for Engagement with Content. Only the concept mapping treatment group created concept maps during the post-test. Therefore, only the concept mapping treatment groups’ essays received a score for Sophistication of the Concept Map. One-way Analysis of Variance showed a significant mean difference in Persuasive Content and Engagement with Content between the three treatment groups. Concept Mapping had the highest mean scores on each, followed by Four Square and then the control. Pearson’s product-moment correlation showed a moderate positive correlation between Sophistication of Concept Map and both Persuasive Content and Engagement with Content. Positive correlations were also found between prior KCCT scores and persuasive writing scores and prior writing portfolio scores and persuasive writing scores. No significant correlation was found between gender and persuasive writing scores or race/ethnicity and persuasive writing scores. The results of this study indicate that Concept Mapping improves Persuasive Content and Engagement with Content when used as a graphic organizer in the writing of persuasive essays.

The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of a writing workshop with a goal setting intervention on writing quality, quantity and self-efficacy. Students in Treatment 1 used the writing workshop process and received a teacher-supported goal setting intervention in the self-edit step of the writing process consistent with the Self-Regulated Strategy Development approach. Students in Treatment 2 received only writing workshop instruction and a generic checklist in the self-edit step. Students in the Comparator group received business-as-usual writing instruction in their language arts/social studies block. Writing measures document quality of writing through a holistic scale, quantity of writing through word counts, and the quantity of writing through parsable units. The Writer Self-Perception Scale, or WSPS, measured students' self-efficacy in writing for the Treatment 1 and Treatment 2 groups. This study expands on existing research that explores strategy interventions in writing workshops to increase student achievement in writing.

No description available.

Research questions addressed whether (1) the instruction was effective, (2) performance on persuasive tasks differed by grade level following instruction, (3) performance on persuasive tasks differed by Piagetian developmental level following instruction, and (4) whether performance differed between monolingual and bilingual subjects. Students wrote four persuasive compositions for assessment, two before instruction was administered and two after instruction. Knudson's holistic scoring rubric was used to evaluate essays for overall quality. Other measures of writing were evaluated including the number of words students used in their writing, the number of reasons included in the essay, the number of reasons per hundred words, and whether the paper had a conclusion or not. Further, the number of elaborations used in the paper was determined, as well as the number of elaborations per hundred words, and the ratio of the number of words used in elaborations compared with the total number of words in the composition.

English Language Learners (ELLs) are a growing population within the U.S. school system. In the secondary grades, this diverse group requires instruction to improve not only English language proficiency but also utilization of the academic language register, especially in writing tasks. The present study focused on ELLs in middle school. The aim was to explore the effects of enhanced Self–Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) writing instruction on the use of complex language, particularly elaborated noun phrases (ENPs) when SRSD was combined with linguistic instruction on increased sentence complexity. As a part of a larger study exploring critical literacy and the persuasive writing instruction of Spanish–English speaking students, this repeated measures design detailed the effects of two six–week instructional periods aimed at teaching 19 ELLs methods for organizing, planning, and constructing persuasive texts (the macr–-structure level), as well as ways of incorporating academic language forms and functions in their writing (the micro–structure level). Within the critical literacy project that involved topics and themes related to immigration, the 19 students produced three texts in English (pre–, mid–, and post–instruction essays). These texts were analyzed for ENP frequency and complexity. Three case studies were also chosen to highlight the variation in ENP outcomes and to discuss additional aspects of persuasive writing at both the macr–- and micro–structure levels. Statistical analysis of group use of ENPs revealed no significant increase in frequency or complexity across essays as simple pre–noun modifications were produced in amounts greater than all other ENP type across all essays. The three case studies revealed that frequency of ENP use generally corresponded to strength of abilities at either the macro–structure level, such as inclusion of more persuasive elements, or the micro–structure level as indicated by increased text length and variety of vocabulary. One implication of these outcomes indicates the need for more in–depth emphasis on the coordination of both the macro– and micro–structure levels in writing instruction studies with ELLs. Other implications pertain to further analysis of classification approaches for designating ENP complexity, and how enhanced understanding of ENP production signals aspects of the academic language register.