I can hardly believe we only have six classes left in the semester. I am thinking about everything we have learned so far about writing in the digital world and writing and reading in the different genres. Despite all we have learned, I am still thinking about how to motivate reluctant writers and engage them in a process they loathe.
Many of the articles we read in the beginning of the semester offered suggestions and strategies to engage some reluctant writers, also some of the articles I read for biographical genre presentation offered strategies and activities that would motivate reluctant writers. For more information on this topic I also turned to the Guthrie and Wigfield’s chapter on engagement and motivation in the Handbook of Reading Research.
Leal (2003) discussed students creating collaborative class books and individual books. I believe the activities described in Leal’s article would interest some reluctant writers. When creating the collaborative class book, students may feel less pressure than composing individually. The individual books described in Leal’s article are appealing because students took photographs to and used them to tell their stories. I think a lot of students would enjoy composing a biography this way.
Hamann, Schultz, Smith, and White (1991) also described a way to engage and motivate reluctant writers. The authors of this article believe students should be given the opportunity to write autobiographies before reading them because it builds relevant background knowledge and helps students to make meaningful connections. I think many of my students would be willing to write an autobiography because they are writing about themselves. Most of my students really like to talk about themselves! I think introducing the autobiographies after writing would allow students to transact more fully with texts and also serve as a model for writing when they write other autobiographies.
I think the Literary Expense Accounts discussed in Taylor’s (2002-2003) article are another way to motivate reluctant students in writing. Although they are not truly composing a writing piece, they are transacting and synthesizing the information they learned about a person. The link-up activity that Taylor discussed would allow students to research facts and people that interest them. Each student would be researching and finding different facts. Reluctant writers would like this activity because they can research any topic they find interesting.
Kucer and Rhodes (1986) describe an activity to use with struggling writers I believe would also increase engagement with reluctant writers. The Card Strategy Lesson discussed in this article removes students’ feelings and pressure of “what do I write about?” Students can use the cards in front of them to form a story, with ideas that are already connected.
I really liked Furr’s (2003) modified version of writer’s workshop. Even struggling, reluctant writers felt comfortable composing because the teachers supported each step of their progress. With this strategy support comes through a variety of modes such as the idea webs, model paragraphs, and teacher and student conferences. After reading this article, I started modeling writing for my students’ science journals. I noticed when I write on the board what students are required to write (like starting an answer), students then have the opportunity to write what they want to. Many students copy what I write on the board and keep on going with their own thoughts. Some students are still stuck and need more support, but at least it gives us a starting point for a conversation and we are not staring at a blank page during a discussion. I feel it removes some of the pressure for my students.
Although Guthrie and Wigfield’s (2000) chapter focuses on reading motivation and engagement, I wonder how much of the information can be transferred over to writing. Does the Matthew effect also apply to writing? I believe it does! I think it only makes sense that good writers tend to write more, which increases competence, which increases motivation, and this increases writing ability.
Guthrie and Wigfield (2000) found that motivation is a “foundational process” (p. 405) in reading engagement. They also found that motivation plays a major factor in disengagement in reading. I think writing can be thought about in the same way. Students must be motivated to write in order for meaningful writing to take place!! I think the strategies and activities discussed in the articles we have read over the semester offer a wide range of possibilities. I know that every activity or strategy will not appeal to or work with all students but I think having a variety of strategies and activities available increases my chances of motivating my students to write. And after reviewing Guthrie and Wigfield’s chapter, I now think it is even more important to motivate reluctant writers!
Furr, D. (2003). Struggling readers get hooked on writing. The Reading Teacher, 56(6), 518-525.
Hamann, L., Schultz, L., Smith, M., & White, B. (1991). Making connections: The power of autobiographical writing before reading. Journal of Reading, 35(1), 24-28.
Guthrie, J. & Wigfield, A. (2000). Engagement and motivation in reading. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 403-422). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kucer, S. B. & Rhodes, L. K. (1986). Counterpart strategies: Fine tuning language with
language. The Reading Teacher, 40(2),186-193.
Leal, D. J. (2003). Digging up the past, building the future: Using book authoring to discover and showcase a community’s history. The Reading Teacher, 57(1), 56-60.
Taylor, G. (2002-2003). Who’s who. Engaging biography study. The Reading Teacher. 56(4). 342-344.
No comments:
Post a Comment