Scaffolding the Writing Process to Assist ELLs Navigating through It

Steven Bookman

1

Purpose of the Grant

The purpose of this grant is to pilot study whether English Language Learners write better essays and pass the exit examinations easier if they followed a procedural or carefully-scaffolded method to writing.

2

Linear vs. Recursive Writing Methods

Linear

• A product-oriented approach treats writing as a procedure (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2009; Reid, 1984).

• Writing is viewed as a mathematical formula (Reid, 1982).

Recursive

• A process-oriented approach treats writing with no plan of action (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2009; Masuda, 2003; Zamel, 1983, 1984).

• There are hierarchical processes that are not fixed in a rigid order (Flower & Hayes, 1981).

3

Rationale for a Carefully-Scaffolded Method to Writing

• Students are able to envision the whole essay before they write it in paragraph form.

• The brainstorming process is more complete and focused.

• The focus is on the outline.

4

Theoretical Framework for a Linear Method to Writing (1)

• Four-component instructional design model (Van Merriënboer, 1997; Van Merriënboer & Kirschner, 2013)– Model where each component of a real-world task

is worked on individually until it becomes proficient while the tasks are completed in its entirety

• Metacognition (Flavell, 1976, 1979)– The awareness and control of one’s own

knowledge

5

Theoretical Framework for a Procedural Method to Writing

(2)• Socratic method

– “…way of teaching in which the master professes to impart no information…but draws forth more and more definite answers by means of pointed questions” (Runes, 2001, pp. 522-523)

6

Using the Socratic Method in my Teaching Method (1)

• Brainstorming is treated as a dialogue in one’s head via question and answer. – The Socratic method helps students consider

other view points (Jackson, 2007).

– Students talk out ideas in their heads (Jackson, 2007).

7

Using the Socratic Method in my Teaching Method (2)

• The Socratic method teaches cognitive skill development (Jackson, 2007).– The act of questioning and answering helps

generate more supporting reasons and details.

– Students sort out and synthesize ideas easier (Jackson, 2007).

– The questions serve as subheadings and supporting reasons.

8

Learning Outcomes for Grant

• Students will create a formal outline.– Outlining is a summative skill. – Outlining is a skill required for other classes

(e.g., Communication [COMM] and Reading [RDL] classes).

• Students will write thesis-based essays.

9

Procedures for the Grant

• Students were introduced to each step of the writing process individually while writing whole essays from the beginning of the semester.

• Each step was thoroughly explained then practiced until it was performed proficiently and effectively before moving to the next step.

10

How Does a Linear Method to Writing Look?

There are three phases to a linear method to writing.

https://bcc-cuny.digication.com/the_theory_and_practice_for_improving_writing_skills_an_alternative_perspective/coursework –Brainstorming Phase–Outlining Phase–Proofreading Phase

11

Brainstorming Phase

12

Outlining Phase

13

Proofreading Phase

14

Assessment

• In-class work

• Homework

• Midterm exam

• Final exam

• One-to-one individual conferences

• Group project

15

Quantitative Results of Grant (1)

• Likert scale result– The students felt more confident about their

writing.

– Although the students felt that they were too many steps in the beginning, they would not change anything about it after they completed the method taught to them during the semester.

16

Quantitative Results of Grant (2)

• Midterm and final exams– Eight out of 13, or 62%, passed midterm

and/or final exams. – Out of the five students who did not pass the

midterm and/or final, two of them did not take the final exam.

– The three who did not pass the midterm and final exams did not follow the method taught to them during the semester.

17

Qualitative Results of Grant

• The students felt they were more focused and organized in the writing, especially in their brainstorming.

• The students were able to come up with more ideas in their brainstorming process.

• The students were able to monitor where they were in the writing process at all times.

• Students were able to monitor sentence junctions much easier.

18

Advantages to Using a Procedural Method to Writing

(1)• Students are more focused.

• Students know exactly where they are in the writing process at all times.

• Students are able to envision the essay before it is written in paragraph form.

• Students are able to brainstorm more ideas and develop an outline much quicker.

19

Advantages to Using a Procedural Method to Writing

(2)• Students are able to monitor sentence

junctions much easier.

20

Disadvantages to Using a Procedural Method to Writing

• Teaching students to create complete outlines takes a long time.

• Some students will resist wanting to generate a complete outline the first time it is introduced to them.

• Some students do not work well with outlines.

21

How Does My Research Fulfill the Grant

• The theme for the grant was to help students get through their remedial, especially Reading (RDL), classes faster.

• Since outlining is a skill that Reading (RDL) classes test on their final exams, students get extra practice and instruction.

• The Socratic method is one way of teaching analytical reading skills.

22

Skills beyond Remedial Classes

• Since a procedural method to writing follows the scientific method, ELLs are exposed to the type of thinking they will be using in their hard and soft science courses.

• Many professors in public speaking classes (COMM 12 and 20) require students to make outlines.

23

References (1)

• Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2009). Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose, process, and practice (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

• Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. Resnick, The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

24

References (2)

• Flavell, J. H. (1979, October). Metacognition and monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

• Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981, December). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387. doi: 10.2307/356600 25

References (3)

• Jackson, J. D. (2007, Spring). Socrates and Langdell in legal writing: Is the Socratic method a proper tool for legal writing classes. California Western Law Review, 43(2), 267-308. Retrieved February 21, 2014, from heinonline.gov.

26

References (4)

• Masuda, P. K. (2003). Process and post-process: A discursive history. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 65-83. doi: 10.1016/s1060-3743(02)00127-3

• Reid, J. (1984, September). The radical outliner and the radical brainstormer: A perspective on composing processes. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 529-534. doi: 10.2307/3586722

27

References (5)

• Reid, J. (1985, June). Comments on Joy Reid's "The Radical Outliner and the Radical Brainstormer: A Perspective on Composing Processes." The Author Responds. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 398-400. doi: 10.2307/3586842

• Runes, D. D. (2001). The dictionary of philosophy. Citadel Press: New York.

28

References (6)

• Van Merriënboer, Jeroen J. G. (1997). Training complete cognitive skills: A four-component instructional design model for technical training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

• Van Merriënboer, Jeroen J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Ten steps to complex learning: A systemic approach to four-component instructional design (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

29

References (7)

• Zamel, V. (1983, June). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165-187. doi: 10.2307/3586647

• Zamel, V. (1984, March). Comments on Vivian Zamel’s “the composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies.” The author responds. TESOL Quarterly, 18(1), 154-158. doi: 10.2307/3586345 30

Contact Information

• Email: steven.bookman@bcc.cuny.edu or steven.bookman@yahoo.com

• Eportfolio: https://bcc-cuny.digication.com/the_theory_and_practice_for_improving_writing_skills_an_alternative_perspective/home

31