Thesis (Ph.D..)--Marshall University, 2009. / Title from document title page. Includes abstract. Document formatted into pages: contains ix, 223 p. Includes bibliographical references p. 183-191.

No description available.

My study examined the belief development of three preservice teachers as they learned to teach writing in a one-semester elementary writing methods course. I also sought to identify significant episodes that contributed to the preservice teachers’ belief development. Two questions guided my inquiry: How do preservice teachers’ beliefs about writing and the teaching of writing develop while enrolled in an elementary writing methods course? and What episodes do preservice teachers, who are enrolled in an elementary writing methods course, view as significant in helping them negotiate their beliefs about writing and writing instruction? I collected survey data, conducted a series of in-depth interviews, and completed 12 classroom observations during the data collection phase of my study. From those data sources, I generated descriptive statistics and followed constant comparative methods to analyze my transcripts and fieldnotes. Using data from two surveys administered on the first day the writing methods course met, I employed stratified purposeful sampling strategy in order to select three case study participants with varied orientations toward writing instruction: Skylar, Natasha, and Samantha. I developed three case study descriptions and conducted cross-case analysis in order to answer both of my research questions. Based upon data from the Writing Instruction Orientation Survey, from classroom observations, and from in-depth interviews, I considered belief development along a continuum from product-orientation to process-orientation for each case study participant at the beginning of the semester and at the end of the semester. The belief development of all three case study participants moved toward a process-orientation of writing instruction by the end of the semester, which was the observed orientation of the instructor in the writing methods course. The three preservice teachers identified learning experiences that required the application of information from readings and class meetings as significant in their belief development. Those assignments included shared writing assignment and in-class writing time and creation of an original publishable piece of writing. One case study participant also identified small group activities conducted in class as significant. The case study participants varied in their application of author’s craft language that matched their emerging process-oriented beliefs. Skylar’s and Natasha’s beliefs about writing instruction evolved from an eclectic orientation at the beginning of the semester to a process-orientation at the end of the semester. They demonstrated a limited ability to apply author’s craft language to match their emerging beliefs. Samantha began the semester holding process-oriented beliefs about writing instruction and grew significantly in her application of author’s craft language that matched her beliefs. These three case study participants experienced varied growth in their ability to talk the talk of a process-oriented writing teacher. The experiences of these three preservice teachers suggest that preservice teachers acquire the ability to recognize teacher behaviors the match their beliefs about writing instruction before their ability to apply the language to accompany emerging beliefs develops. The acquisition of professional discourse to talk about emerging beliefs varied depending on the readiness level of the individual. Findings from my inquiry indicate that teacher educators should consider intentionally designing writing methods courses to include assignments and experiences that involve the application of presented information and developing understandings as a means to foster belief development. This type of opportunity might include field experiences directly related to course assignments, as was the case with the shared writing assignment in my study. Teacher educators might also create situations that allow preservice teachers to apply author’s craft language so that they grow in their ability to talk the talk of a writing teacher. The development of professional discourse is a marker of membership in any community of practice. As preservice teachers work to gain entry into the teaching profession, it should be expected that their ability to apply language of that community develop along a continuum.

No description available.

The purpose of the study was to determine how exceptional writing teachers utilize visual images in their teaching of writing. Specifically, the researcher was interested to discover how drawing might be used as a learning tool in the various stages of the writing process. Nine elementary teachers - recognized as exemplary teachers of writing, completed a detailed questionnaire in reference to their writing instruction. All of the teachers surveyed value visuals highly and recognize the potential impact that drawing can have on writing. However, not all of these teachers are utilizing drawing or visual strategies in their writing instruction on a regular basis. Descriptions of writing instruction and types of visuals used, along with examples, are provided. Additional information was gathered by conducting a case study and observing the instruction of one of the teachers, a particularly information-rich sample, who does integrate drawing and writing. This teacher’s beliefs and resulting purposeful instruction are described as evidence for how others might incorporate these valuable strategies. The data reported here highlights the use of visuals and drawing as instructional tools in writing instruction and supports the conclusion that these strategies can be incorporated into the teaching of writing for more effective instruction.

Second language (L2) teacher cognition has in recent years attracted the attention of an increasing number of researchers. While much L2 teacher cognition research focuses on the teaching of grammar (e.g. Phipps & Borg, 2009), L2 writing teacher cognition has received considerably less attention. It has, however, been suggested that L2 writing teachers’ perceptions of themselves as writers (Casanave, 2004) and as language learners may play a crucial role in their decision making as teachers of L2 writing. In an attempt to address this gap in the L2 teacher cognition literature, this study investigates English as a second language (ESL) writing teachers' beliefs about themselves as language learners and as writers in their first and/or second language(s). The purpose is to discover how ESL writing teachers’ beliefs about and practice of teaching L2 writing are influenced by their experiences in writing in their first and/ or second languages. Three native (NES) and two non-native English-speaking (NNES) teachers teaching L2 writing took part in the study. During a 15-week semester, their ESL writing classes were periodically observed and audio-recorded. Additionally, each teacher was interviewed two times using stimulated recall regarding both their classroom instructional practices and instruction provided in the margins of student papers. Findings revealed that, language learning in general was an important contributor to both NNES and NES teachers’ cognitions. Even NES teachers who were not advanced in their respective second and/or additional languages still referred to their language learning experiences. The NNES teacher participants also commented that they sometimes had to step out of their own language experience in order to better help their students. Results also indicated that L2 writing teachers without advanced L2 literacy skills were influenced primarily by their L1 writing experiences. L2 writing teachers with advanced L2 literacy skills, however, were greatly influenced by their L2 writing experience. In all of the cases, being an advanced writer, whether in their L1 or L2s, was an important contributor to L2 writing teachers’ cognitions.

A growing body of writing research suggests college students’ and teachers’ conceptualizations of writing play an important role in learning to write and making the transition from secondary to post-secondary academic composition. First-year college writers are not blank slates; rather, they bring many assumptions and beliefs about academic writing to the first-year writing classroom from exposure to a wide range of literate practices throughout their lives. Metaphor acts as a way for scholars to trace students’ as well as their instructors’ assumptions and beliefs about writing. In this study, I contend that metaphor is a pathway to meta-cognitive awareness, mindfulness, and reflection. This multi-method descriptive study applies metaphor analysis to a corpus of more than a dozen first-year composition students’ endof-semester writing portfolios; the study also employs an auto-ethnographic approach to examining this author’s texts composed as a graduate student and novice teacher. In several cases writing students in this study appeared to reconfigure their metaphors for writing and subsequently reconsider their assumptions about writing. My literature review and analysis suggests that metaphor remains an underutilized inventive and reflective strategy in composition pedagogy. Based on these results, I suggest that instructors consider how metaphoric competence might offer writers and writing instructors an alternate means for operationalizing key habits of mind such as meta-cognitive awareness, reflection, openness to learning, and creativity as recommended in the Framework for Success in Post-Secondary Writing. Ultimately, I argue that writers and teachers might benefit from adopting a more flexible attitude towards metaphor. As a rhetorical trope, metaphors are contextual and, thus, writers need to learn to mix, discard, create, and obscure metaphors as required by the situation.