Málfríður - 15.03.2011, Side 14

Málfríður - 15.03.2011, Side 14
All of these teaching “moves” and much more will be covered in depth when Jeff and his wife Peggy Jo visit Iceland this summer. They are looking forward to meet- ing many of you and helping you to help your students through various kinds and processes of composing. – – – Jeffrey D. Wilhelm is Professor of English Education at Boise State University and the Director of the Boise State Writing Project. He is the author of 18 books about literacy and literacy teaching. He is the win- ner of the NCTE Promising Research Award and the Russell Award for Distinguished Research in English Education. Jim Fredricksen is an Assistant Professor of English Education at Boise State University and a Co-Director of the Boise State Writing Project. His research focuses on the conversations teachers have with one another about their work as educators. Peggy Jo Wilhelm has been a teacher of music and the humanities for 25 years, and was a professor of music education for 8 of those years. She is dedicated to the teaching of wisdom through the humanities, arts and languages. She is the author of two books on educa- tion. Works Cited: Bolter, J. D. (1991). Writing space: The computer, hypertext and the history of writing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Egawa, K. (1998). Writing in the middle grades. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. McLeod, S. & Miraglia, E. (2001). Writing across the curriculum in a time of change. In S. McLeod, E. Miraglia, M. Soven, and C. Thaiss (Eds.), WAC for the new millennium: Strategies for continuing writing across the curriculum programs (pp. 1–27). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. National Writing Project and Carl Nagin (2003). Because Writing Matters: Improving student writing in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Shanahan, T. (2004). Overcoming the dominance of communication: Writing to think and learn. In T.L. Jetton & J.A. Doyle (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice (pp. 59–74). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Tierney, R. and Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading-writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M.L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. Pearson (Eds.). Handbook of reading research: Vol. 2 (pp. 246–280). New York: Longman. Smith, M. W., & Wilhelm. J. (2002). „Reading don’t fix no Chevys“: Literacy in the lives of young men. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Smith, M. and Wilhelm, J. 2006 Going with the Flow. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Smith, M. W. and Wilhelm, J.D. (2007). Getting it Right: Fresh approaches to teaching language use and grammar. New York: Scholastic. Wilhelm, J. (2001). Improving Comprehension with think alouds. New York: Scholastic. Wilhelm, J.D. (2007). Engaging Readers and Writers with Inquiry. New York: Scholastic. Wilhelm, Jeffrey D., Wilhelm, Peggy J., Boas, E. (2009). Inquiring Minds Learn to Read and Write. Toronto: Rubicon. to technology, a low-tech scrapbook could be created with student writing, photographs and the like. Blogs or gallery walk. Blogs, chats and forums are all on-line discussion platforms that students enjoy. Students can be asked to create and contribute to blogs and forums in different ways. A low-tech version is to have students post a piece of writing somewhere in the classroom and then ask each student in the class to visit each post and to write a comment or response to it. Pen pals. Pen pal projects have been found to pro- vide authentic audiences and contexts of real commu- nication for students at all levels, elementary through college, with huge positive effects. Artist statements – BSWP fellow Jerry Hendershot has students create various visual responses to read- ings, and then to create artist statements that explore what they created, how they created it, and what this composition means and how it means this. This is a kind of culminating process analysis of their compos- ing process. Formal writing All of this informal writing helps students to get the “stuff” or content to use for more formal composing, and to practice putting this “stuff” into the form of a conventional argument, extended definition, classifica- tion scheme, narrative, etc. We’ve devised and made good use of a heuristic called the inquiry square that takes students through five kinds of knowledge nec- essary to formal writing: knowledge of purpose (e.g. through essential questions), procedural knowledge of substance (knowing how to get the stuff to write about, e.g. frontloading and formative assessment activities) and declaration knowledge of substance (knowing how to name the concepts you have found to write about, through all of the activities above), procedural knowledge of form (knowing how to shape the stuff you have into a conventional form, e.g. Frayer charts for extended definitions) and declarative knowledge of form (knowing how to name the form of a piece of writing and how this form works to create meaning, e.g. process analyses and think alouds). A benefit of such work, in our experience, is that it naturally leads to public writing and service learning. Such efforts “help students understand the connection of learning to life, to stimulate students’ social con- sciences, and to help establish writing as social action (McLeod & Miraglia, 2001, p. 9). Additionally, writing to learn “provides students with meaningful writing tasks – real projects for real audiences . . . that links writing to a particular social context and knowledge base, demonstrating the important of contextual issues in learning how to write” and use language (p. 10). 14 MÁLFRÍÐUR

x

Málfríður

Direkte link

Hvis du vil linke til denne avis/magasin, skal du bruge disse links:

Link til denne avis/magasin: Málfríður
https://timarit.is/publication/1081

Link til dette eksemplar:

Link til denne side:

Link til denne artikel:

Venligst ikke link direkte til billeder eller PDfs på Timarit.is, da sådanne webadresser kan ændres uden advarsel. Brug venligst de angivne webadresser for at linke til sitet.