Teachers' Orientations toward Writing Instruction (original) (raw)
2013, Journal of Writing Research
In the 1970s a shift in the dominant theory of writing instruction began, away from a focus on the written product and form of writing toward an emphasis on the writing process in all of its complexity (Freedman, Dyson, Flower, & Chafe, 1987). Several overlapping but distinct definitions and theories of process writing arising from cognitive, social constructivist, and naturalistic frameworks have evolved. For instance, Hayes and Flower (1980; 1986) have seen writing as a goal-directed cognitive activity involving planning, translating, and reviewing that requires rhetorical knowledge, subject matter knowledge, and strategic knowledge. Other researchers emphasize writing as a social activity associated with particular practices (Bruffee, 1984; Freedman, Dyson, Flower, & Chafe, 1987; Scribner & Cole, 1981). As a social process, the features of audience and purpose are highlighted. Shaunessey (1977) sees composing as a socialization process in which the writer brings his/her thinking in line with discourse conventions of the community of readers. Nystrand (1989) argues in a similar way that writing is a social interactive process between readers and writers within discourse communities. Educators and researchers from a more naturalistic tradition see writing as a natural process that can be activated by encouraging environments (e.g., Emig, 1981). Graves (1983) and Calkins (1986) also see the establishment of a literate environment as crucial to teaching students how to express themselves. Although these theories of writing and their links to process approaches dominate the literature, a gap remains between the theories and how they are enacted in classrooms (Applebee, 1986). Applebee found that writing was used primarily to assess learning, that prewriting activities constituted a minimum amount of time, and that peer response groups occurred in only a minority of classrooms. District-wide writing tests, minimal support for instructional innovation, and system-wide pressure for improving achievement tests scores are some of the reasons researchers have suggested for the difficulties of changing classroom norms that would support process approaches (Florio-Ruane, 1991; Michaels, 1987; Ulichney & Watson-Gegeo, 1989). Additionally, teachers' views about writing may play a role in how they implement writing programs within classrooms similar to the relationship between teachers' stated beliefs about the reading process and their classroom practices (Richardson, Anders, Tidwell, & Lloyd, 1991). If teachers hold traditional views of writing as consisting of appropriate syntax, grammatical structures,