CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 226Writing and Handwriting EducationReflective Practices in EducationInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Trends in Research on Writing as a Learning Activity

Open access
Klein, P. D., Boscolo, P.·2016·Journal of Writing Research
DOI 10.17239/jowr-2016.07.03.01
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This article discusses five trends in research on writing as a learning activity. Firstly, earlier decades were marked by conflicting views about the effects of writing on learning; in the past decade, the use of meta-analysis has shown that the effects of writing on learning are reliable, and that several variables mediate and moderate these effects. Secondly, in earlier decades, it was thought that text as a medium inherently elicited thinking and learning. Research during the past decade has indicated that writing to learn is a self-regulated activity, dependent on the goals and strategies of the writer. Thirdly, the Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) movement emphasized domain-general approaches to WTL. Much recent research is consistent with the Writing in the Disciplines (WID) movement, incorporating genres that embody forms of reasoning specific to a given discipline. Fourthly, WTL as a classroom practice was always partially social, but the theoretical conceptualization of it was largely individual. During the past two decades, WTL has broadened to include theories and research that integrate social and psychological processes. Fifthly, WTL research has traditionally focused on epistemic learning in schools; more recently, it has been extended to include reflective learning in the professions and additional kinds of outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.17239/jowr-2016.07.03.01

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In higher education, most writing across disciplines relies on reading and integrating external sources.

    “At the college level, most writing-whatever the discipline-is based on reading and integrating external documents (Klein et al. 2016;Klein and Yu 2013;Perin 2013).”

    From Learning paths in synthesis writing: Which learning path contributes most to which learning outcome? (2020) · cites this paper as Klein et al. 2016

    Section 4.5 (Discourse Synthesis; page unavailable) describes writing from sources as reading and integrating multiple texts. Section 4.3 discusses college writing across disciplines, but the paper does not establish that most college writing, regardless of discipline, is based on external documents. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 249 · Cited by 226

Research works printed but not linked: 201

  1. Akerlind, G. S. (2008). Growing and developing as a university researcher. Higher Education, 55, 241-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-007-9052-x · DOI
  2. Akkus, R., Gunel, M., & Hand, B. (2007). Comparing an inquiry-based approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic to traditional science teaching practices: Are there differences? International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1745-1765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 09500690601075629 · DOI
  3. Alamargot, D., & Chanquoy, L. (2001). Through the models of writing. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0804-4 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Applebee, A. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 577-596. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543054004577 · DOI
  5. Atasoy, S. (2013). Effect of writing-to-learn strategy on undergraduates' conceptual understanding of electrostatics. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22, 593-602. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s40299-013-0062-4 · DOI
  6. Baker, E. A. (2010). The new literacies. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  7. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. V. W. McGee (Trans). Austin, Tx: University of Texas Press.
  8. Bazerman, C. (1981). What written knowledge does: Three examples of academic discourse. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 11, 361-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0048393181 01100305 · DOI
  9. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
  10. Bazerman, C. (2009). Genre and cognitive development: Beyond writing to learn. In Bazerman, Bonini, & Figueiredo (Eds.), Genre in a changing world (pp. 279-294). Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse.
  11. Bazerman, C., Little, J., Bethel, L. Chavkin, T., Fouquette, D., & Garufis, J. (2005). Reference guide to writing across the curriculum. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor Press and the WAC Clearinghouse.
  12. Beaufort, A. (2008). Writing in the professions. In C. Bazerman (Ed.), Handbook of research on writing (pp. 221-235). New York: Erlbaum.
  13. Benus, M. J., Yarker, M. B., Hand, B. M., & Norton-Meier, L. A. (2013). Analysis of discourse practices in elementary science classrooms using argument-based inquiry during whole-class dialogue. In M. Khine, & I. Saleh (Eds.) Approaches and strategies in next generation science learning (pp. 224-245). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:10.4018/978-1- 4666-2809-0.ch012 http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-2809-0. · DOI
  14. Berkentotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1993). Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective. Written Communication, 10, 475-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010004001 · DOI
  15. Berthold, K., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2007). Do learning protocols support learning strategies and outcomes? The role of cognitive and metacognitive prompts. Learning and Instruction, 17, 564-577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.007 · DOI
  16. Biber, D.& Vasquez, C. (2008). Writing and speaking. In C. Bazerman (Ed.) Handbook of research on Writing: History, society, school, individual, text (pp. 535-548). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  17. Boscolo, P. (1996). The use of information in expository text writing. In C. Pontecorvo, M. Orsolini, B. Burge, & L. B. Resnick (Eds.), Children's early text construction (pp. 209-227).
  18. Boscolo, P. (2014). Two metaphors for writing research and their implications for writing instruction. In B. Arfé, J. Dockrell, & V. W. Berninger (Eds.), Writing development in children with hearing loss, dyslexia, or oral language problems. Implications for assessment and instruction (pp. 33-42). New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ acprof:oso/9780199827282.003.0003 · DOI
  19. Boscolo, P., & Carotti, L. (2003). Does writing contribute to improving high school students' approach to literature? L1 -Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 3, 197-224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:ESLL.0000003685.30925. · DOI
  20. Boscolo, P., & Mason, L. (2001). Writing to learn, writing to transfer. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 83-104). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0740-5_6 · DOI
  21. Breuer, E., Newman, S., & Newman, J. (in press). Learning to write as a professional: Engineers and health professionals in the United Kingdom and Germany. In M. Betrancourt, G. Ortoleva, & S. Billett (Eds.), Writing for professional development. Leiden: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1163/9789004264830_014 · DOI
  22. Britt, M. A., & Rouet, J.F. (2012). Learning with multiple documents: Component skills and their acquisition. In J. R. Kirby & M. J. Lawson (Eds.), Enhancing the quality of learning: Dispositions, instruction, and learning processes (pp. 276-314). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139048224.017 · DOI
  23. Britton, J. (1982a). Writing-to-learn and learning to write. In Pradl, G. M. (ed.), Prospect and retrospect: Selected essays of James Britton. Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc., Montclair, NJ, pp. 94-111. (Reprinted from The Humanity of English: NCTE Distinguished Lectures 1972).
  24. Britton, J. (1982b). Shaping at the point of utterance. In G. M. Pradl (Ed.), Prospect and retrospect: Selected essays of James Britton (pp.139-145). Montclair, NJ: Boynton/Cook.
  25. Cantrell, R. J., Fusaro, J. A., & Dougherty, E. A. (2000): Exploring the effectiveness of journal writing on learning social studies: A comparative study, Reading Psychology, 21, 1-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/027027100278310 · DOI
  26. Carlson, P., & Berry, F. C. (2008). Using computer-mediated peer review in an engineering design course. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 51, 264-279. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1109/TPC.2008.2001254 · DOI
  27. Cattaneo, A., & Boldrini, E. (in press). Individual and collaborative writing-to-learn activities in vocational education: An overview of different instructional strategies. In M. Betrancourt, G. Ortoleva, & S. Billett (Eds.), Writing for professional development. Leiden: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004264830_011 · DOI
  28. Carter, M., Ferzli, M., & Wiebe, E. N. (2007). Writing to learn by learning to write in the disciplines. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 21, 278-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1050651907300466 · DOI
  29. Cerdán, R., & Vidal-Abarca, E. (2008). The effects of tasks on integrating information from multiple documents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 209-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022- 0663.100.1.209 · DOI
  30. Chen, Y. C., Hand, B., & McDowell, L. (2013). The effects of writing-to-learn activities on elementary students' conceptual understanding: Learning about force and motion through writing to older peers. Science Education, 97, 745 -771. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.21067 · DOI
  31. Childers, P. B., Gere, A. R., & Young, A. (Eds.). (1994). Programs and practices: Writing across the secondary school curriculum. Boynton/Cook Pub.
  32. Choi, A., Hand, B., & Norton-Meier, L. (2014). Grade 5 students' online argumentation about their in-class inquiry investigations. Research in Science Education, 44, 267-287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-013-9384-8 · DOI
  33. Christensen, L. M. (1999). Critical literacy: Teaching reading, writing, and outrage. In C. Edelesky (Ed.), Making justice our project (pp. 209-225). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
  34. Chuy, M., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2012). Development of ideational writing through knowledge building. In E. L. L. Grigorenko, E. Mambrino, D. D. D. Preiss (Eds.) Writing: A Mosaic of New Perspectives (pp. 175-190). Psychology Press.
  35. Comber, B., Thomson, P., & Wells, M. (2001). Critical literacy finds a" place": Writing and social action in a low-income Australian grade 2/3 classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 451-464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/499681 · DOI
  36. Correnti, R., Matsumura, L. C., Hamilton, L. S., & Wang, E. (2012). Combining multiple measures of students' opportunities to develop analytic, text-based writing skills. Educational Assessment, 17, 132-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2012.717035 · DOI
  37. Craik, F. I. M., and Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour 11, 671-684. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ S0022-5371(72)80001-X · DOI · Paper page
  38. Craik, F. I. M., and Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268-294. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268 · DOI · Paper page
  39. Cronin, B. (2004). Bowling alone together: Academic writing as distributed cognition. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55, 557-560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.10406 · DOI
  40. De La Paz, S. (2005). Effects of historical reasoning instruction and writing strategy mastery in culturally and academically diverse middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 139-156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.139 · DOI
  41. De La Paz, S., & Felton, M. K. (2010). Reading and writing from multiple source documents in history: Effects of strategy instruction with low to average high school writers. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 174-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2010.03.001 · DOI
  42. De La Paz, S., & Wissinger, D. R. (2015). Effects of genre and content knowledge on historical thinking with academically diverse high school students. The Journal of Experimental Education, 83(1), 110-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2013.876228 · DOI
  43. Demirbag, M., & Gunel, M. (2014). Integrating argument-based science inquiry with modal representations: Impact on science achievement, argumentation, and writing skills. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14, 386-391. http://dx.doi.org/10.12738/ estp.2014.1.1632 · DOI
  44. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder & S. Barnes (Ed.), Technology-enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 3-19). Netherlands: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1 · DOI
  45. Donald, M. (1991). Origins of the modern mind. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
  46. Drabick, D. A., Weisberg, R., Paul, L., & Bubier, J. L. (2007). Keeping it short and sweet: Brief, ungraded writing assignments facilitate learning. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 172-176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00986280701498558 · DOI
  47. Elbow, P. (1973). Writing without teachers. New York: Oxford University Press.
  48. Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with power. New York: Oxford University Press.
  49. Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122- 128. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/356095 · DOI
  50. Engeström, Y. (2009). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels & K. D. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 303-328). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809989.020 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Englert, C. S., Mariage, T. V., & Dunsmore, K. (2006). Tenets of sociocultural theory in writing instruction research. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of research on writing (pp. 208-221). New York: The Guilford Press.
  52. Fahnestock, J., & Secor, M. (1991). The rhetoric of literary criticism. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities (pp. 77-96). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
  53. Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Okolo, C. M. (2001). Teaching for historical understanding in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 59-71. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2307/1511296 · DOI
  54. Fisher, D. (2007). CMS-based simulations in the writing classroom: Evoking genre through game play. Computers and Composition, 24, 179-197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2006. 06.004 · DOI
  55. Flower, L. & Hayes, J. R. (1981a). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/356600 · DOI · Paper page
  56. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981b). Plans that guide the composing process. In M. F. Whitman, (Ed.), Writing: The nature development, and teaching of written communication (Volume 1, pp. 39-58). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  57. Freedman, A., & Smart, G. (1997). Navigating the current of economic policy: Written genres and the distribution of cognitive work at a financial institution. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4, 238- 255. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca0404_3 · DOI
  58. Galbraith, D. (1992). Conditions for discovery through writing. Instructional Science, 21, 45-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00119655 · DOI
  59. Galbraith, D. (1996). Self-monitoring, discovery through writing and individual differences in drafting strategy. In Rijlaarsdam, G., van den Bergh, H., and Couzjin, M. (Eds.), Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 121-141). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
  60. Galbraith, D. (1999) Writing as a knowledge-constituting process. In M. Torrance & D. Galbraith (Eds.), Knowing What to Write: Conceptual Processes in Text Production (pp. 139-159. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.
  61. Galbraith, D. (2009). Writing about what we know: Generating ideas in writing. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, J. Riley, & M. Nystrand (Eds.), The Sage handbook of writing development (pp. 48-64). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9780857021069. · DOI
  62. Galbraith, D., Ford, S., Walker, G. & Ford, J. (2005). The contribution of different components of working memory to knowledge transformation during writing. L1 -Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 5, 113-145. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10674-005-0119-2 · DOI
  63. Gelati, C., Galvan, N., & Boscolo, P. (2014). Summary writing as a tool for improving the comprehension of expository texts: An intervention study in primary school. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in writing, Vol. 28: Writing as a learning activity (pp. 191-216). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
  64. Gere, A. R. (Ed.). (1985). Roots in the sawdust: Writing to learn across the disciplines. Urbana: IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
  65. Gil, L., Bråten, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., & Strømsø, H. I. (2010). Summary versus argument tasks when working with multiple documents: Which is better for whom. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 157-173. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.11.002 · DOI
  66. Gillespie, A., Graham, S., Kiuhara, S., & Hebert, M. (2014). High school teachers' use of writing to support students' learning: a national survey. Reading and Writing, 27, 1043-1072. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9494-8 · DOI
  67. Gingerich, K. J., Bugg, J. M., Doe, S. R., Rowland, C. A., Richards, T. L., Tompkins, S. A., & McDaniel, M. A. (2014). Active processing via write-to-learn assignments: Learning and retention benefits in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 41, 303-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0098628314549701 · DOI
  68. Glogger, I., Holzäpfel, L., Schwonke, R., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2009). Activation of learning strategies in writing learning journals. Zeitschrift für pädagogische Psychologie, 23, 95-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1024/1010-0652.23.2.95 · DOI
  69. Glogger, I., Schwonke, R., Holzäpfel, L., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2012). Learning strategies assessed by journal writing: Prediction of learning outcomes by quantity, quality, and combinations of learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 452-468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026683 · DOI
  70. Goody, J., & Watt, I. (1963). The consequences of literacy. Comparative studies in society and history, 5, 304-345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500001730 · DOI
  71. Gunel, M., Hand, B., & Gunduz, S. (2006). Comparing student understanding of quantum physics when embedding multimodal representations into two different writing formats: Presentation format versus summary report format. Science Education, 90, 1092-1112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.20160 · DOI
  72. Gunel, M., Hand, B., & McDermott, M. A. (2009). Writing for different audiences: Effects on high- school students' conceptual understanding of biology. Learning and Instruction, 19, 354-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.07.001 · DOI
  73. Haas, C., & Witte, S. P. (2001). Writing as an embodied practice: The case of engineering standards. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 15, 413-457. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/105065190101500402 · DOI
  74. Hand, B., Gunel, M., & Ulu, C. (2009). Sequencing embedded multimodal representations in a writing to learn approach to the teaching of electricity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 225-247. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.20282 · DOI
  75. Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E. M. (2004). Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 131-149. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/0950069032000070252 · DOI
  76. Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1996). Making the writing process work: Strategies for composition and self-regulation. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
  77. Hartley, J., & Tynjälä, P. (2001). New technology, writing and learning. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 161-182). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0740-5_10 · DOI
  78. Hartman, G. H. (1978). Blessing the Torrent: On Wordsworth's later style. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 93, 196-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/461955 · DOI
  79. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organization of the writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  80. Hayes, J. R. (2012). Modeling and remodeling writing. Written communication, 29, 369-388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741088312451260 · DOI · Paper page
  81. Hebert, M., Gillespie, A., & Graham, S. (2013). Comparing effects of different writing activities on reading comprehension: A meta-analysis. Reading and Writing, 26, 111-138. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/s11145-012-9386-3 · DOI
  82. Hebert, M., Graham, S., Rigby-Wills, H., & Ganson, K. (2014). Effects of note-taking and extended writing on expository text comprehension: Who benefits? Learning Disabilities--A Contemporary Journal, 12(1), 43-68.
  83. Hewitt, J., & Scardamalia, M. (1998). Design principles for distributed knowledge building processes. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 75-96.
  84. Holyoak, K. J., & Morrison, R. G. (2012). The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning. New York: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022810231840 · DOI
  85. Hoover, L. A. (1994). Reflective writing as a window on pre-service teachers' thought processes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(1), 83-93. doi:10.1016/0742-051X(94)90042-6 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(94)90042-6 · DOI
  86. Huang, S. Y. (2011). Reading "further and beyond the text": student perspectives of critical literacy in EFL reading and writing. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55, 145-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.00017 · DOI
  87. Hübner, S., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2010). Writing learning journals: Instructional support to overcome learning-strategy deficits. Learning and Instruction, 20, 18-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.12.001 · DOI
  88. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1985). Classroom conflict: Controversy versus debate in learning groups. American Educational Research Journal, 22, 237-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/ 00028312022002237 · DOI
  89. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2002). Learning together and alone: Overview and meta- analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22, 95-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 0218879020220110 · DOI
  90. Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental perspective. Journal of writing research, 1, 1-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2008.01.01.1 · DOI · Paper page
  91. Kember, D. (Ed.). (2001). Reflective Teaching and Learning in the Health Profession. Oxford: Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470690550 · DOI
  92. Kember, D., McKay, J., Sinclair, K., & Wong, F. K. Y. (2008). A four-category scheme for coding and assessing the level of reflection in written work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 369-379. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02602930701293355 · DOI · Paper page
  93. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the Science Writing Heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1065-1084. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199912) 36:10<1065::AID-TEA2>3.0.CO;2-I Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2006). Writing as a learning tool: Testing the role of students' writing strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 21, 17-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03173567 · DOI
  94. Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2008). An aptitude-treatment interaction approach to writing-to-learn. Learning and Instruction, 18, 379-390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.learninstruc.2007.07.004 · DOI
  95. Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 203-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1021913217147 · DOI
  96. Klein, P. D. (2000). Elementary students' strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 317-348. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1803_2 · DOI
  97. Klein, P. D. (2004). Constructing scientific explanations through writing. Instructional Science, 32, 191-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000024189.74263.bd · DOI
  98. Klein, P. D. (2014) Knowledge construction in collaborative science writing: Strategic simplicity, distributed complexity, and explanatory sophistication. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 28, Writing as a Learning activity (pp. 300-326). The Netherlands: Brill.
  99. In M. Torrance, D. Galbraith, & L. Van Waes (Eds.), Writing and Cognition: Research and Application (pp. 201-217). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  100. Klein, P. D., Haug, K. & Arcon, N. (2015, August). Argument writing as discovery: Effects on cognitive load, reasoning, and learning in science. Paper presented at the Argument-Based Inquiry Conference. Spokane, Washington.
  101. Klein, P. D., & Kirkpatrick, L. C. (2010). A framework for content area writing: Mediators and moderators. Journal of Writing Research, 2, 1-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/jowr- 2010.02.01.1 · DOI
  102. Klein, P. D., & Leacock, T. L. (2012). Distributed cognition as a framework for understanding writing. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions of cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology (pp. 133-152). New York: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis Group.
  103. Klein, P. D., Piacente-Cimini, S., & Williams, L. A. (2007). The role of writing in learning from analogies. Learning and Instruction, 17, 595-611. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc. 2007.09.006 · DOI
  104. Klein, P. D., & Samuels, B. (2010). Learning about plate tectonics through argument writing. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 56, 196-217.
  105. Kostouli, T. (2009). A sociocultural framework: Writing as social practice. In R. Beard, D. Myhill, M. Nystrand, & J. Riley (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Writing Development (pp. 98-116). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9780857021069. · DOI
  106. Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., & Tsatsarelis, C. (Eds.). (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.
  107. Kurunsaari, M., Tynjälä, P., & Piirainen, A. (in press). Students' experiences of reflective writing as a tool for learning in physiotherapy education. In M. Betrancourt, G. Ortoleva, & S. Billett (Eds.), Writing for professional development. Leiden: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/ 9789004264830_008 · DOI
  108. Leijten, M., Van Waes, L., Schriver, K., & Hayes, J.R. (2014). Writing in the workplace: Constructing documents using multiple digital sources. Journal of Writing Research, 5, 285- 337. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2014.05.03.3 · DOI
  109. Leopold, C. & Leutner, D. (2012). Science text comprehension: Drawing, main idea selection, and summarizing as learning strategies. Learning and Instruction, 22, 16-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.05.005 · DOI
  110. Leopold, C., Sumfleth, E., & Leutner, D. (2013). Learning with summaries: Effects of representation mode and type of learning activity on comprehension and transfer. Learning and Instruction, 27, 40-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.02.003 · DOI
  111. Leu, D. J., Kinzer, C. K., Coiro, J. L., & Cammack, D. W. (2004). Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication technologies. In R. B. Ruddell & N. J. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 1570- 1613). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
  112. Lewis, W. E., & Ferretti, R. P. (2009). Defending interpretations of literary texts: The effects of topoi instruction on the literary arguments of high school students. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 25, 250-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10573560903120656 · DOI
  113. Lewis, W. E., & Ferretti, R. P. (2011). Topoi and literary interpretation: The effects of a critical reading and writing intervention on high school students' analytic literary essays. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36, 334-354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych. 2011.06.001 · DOI
  114. Linnakylä, P. (2001). Portfolio: Integrating writing, learning and assessment. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 145-160). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  115. Linton, D. L., Pangle, W. M., Wyatt, K. H., Powell, K. N., & Sherwood, R. E. (2014). Identifying key features of effective active learning: the effects of writing and peer discussion. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 13, 469-477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0242 · DOI
  116. Luke, A. (2012). Critical literacy: Foundational notes. Theory into practice, 51, 4-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2012.636324 · DOI
  117. MacArthur, C. A. (2014). Strategy instruction in writing in academic disciplines. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in Writing, Vol. 28: Writing as a Learning Activity (pp. 149-168). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/978900 · DOI
  118. Martínez, I., Mateos, M & Martín, E. (in press). Analysis of effective instructional sequences in upper primary education to enhance content-learning through the integrated use of reading and writing; key components and possible improvements. In R. Fidalgo, K. Harris & M. Braaksma (Eds.), Design Principles for Teaching Effective Writing. The Netherlands: Springer.
  119. Martínez, I., Mateos, M., Martín, E., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2015). Learning history by composing synthesis texts: Effects of an instructional program on learning, reading, and writing processes, and text quality. Journal of Writing Research, 7(2), 275-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/jowr- 2015.07.02.03 · DOI
  120. Mason, L. (1998). Sharing cognition to construct scientific knowledge in school context: The role of oral and written discourse. Instructional Science, 26, 359-389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/ A:1003103213786 · DOI
  121. Mason, L., & Boscolo, P. (2001). Writing to learn, writing to transfer. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason & K. Lonka (Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 83-104). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  122. Mason, L., & Tornatora, M. C. (2014). Analogical encoding with and without instructions for case comparison of scientific phenomena. Educational Psychology, (ahead-of-print), 1-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.953038 · DOI
  123. Mateos, M., Martín, E., Villalón, R., & Luna, M. (2008). Reading and writing to learn in secondary education: Online processing activity and written products in summarizing and synthesizing tasks. Reading and Writing, 21, 675-697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9086-6 · DOI
  124. Mateos, M., Solé, I., Martín, E., Cuevas, I., Miras, M. & Castells, N. (2014). Writing a synthesis from multiple sources as a learning activity. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in writing, Vol. 28: Writing as a learning activity (pp. 169-190). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004265011_009 · DOI · Paper page
  125. McCrindle, A. R., and Christensen, C. A. (1995). The impact of learning journals on metacognitive and cognitive processes and learning performance. Learning and Instruction, 5, 167-185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(95)00010-Z McCutchen, D., Teske, P., & Bankston, C. (2008). Writing and cognition: Implications of the cognitive architecture for learning to write and writing to learn. In C. Bazerman (Ed.) Handbook of research on Writing: History, society, school, individual, text (pp. 451-465). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. · DOI
  126. McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2013). The impact of embedding multiple modes of representation within writing tasks on high school students' chemistry understanding. Instructional Science, 41, 217-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-012-9225-6 · DOI
  127. McLeod, S., & Maimon, E. (2000). Clearing the air: WAC myths and realities. College English, 62, 573-583. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/378962 · DOI
  128. McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg galaxy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  129. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Synergy between teacher practices and curricular scaffolds to support students in using domain-specific and domain-general knowledge in writing arguments to explain phenomena. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18, 416-460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508400903013488 · DOI
  130. Milian, M. (2005). Reformulation: A means of constructing knowledge in shared writing. L1- Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 5, 335-351. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10674- 005-8560-9 · DOI
  131. Monroe, J. (2002). Writing and revising the disciplines. Cornell University Press.
  132. Murray, D. M. (1980). Writing as process: How writing finds its own meaning. In Donovan, T. R., and McLelland, B. W. (Eds.), Eight approaches to teaching composition (pp. 3-20). National Council of Teachers in English, Urbana, IL.
  133. Myers, G. (1985). The social construction of two biologists' proposals. Written Communication, 2/3, 219-245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741088385002003001 · DOI
  134. Nelson, N. (2001). Writing to learn: One theory, two rationales. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 23-36). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  135. Newell, G. E. (2006). Writing to learn. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 235-247). The Guilford Press.
  136. Nückles, M., Hübner, S., Dümer, S., & Renkl, A. (2010). Expertise reversal effects in writing-to- learn. Instructional Science, 38, 237-258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11251-009-9106-9 · DOI · Paper page
  137. Nykopp, M., Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2014). University students' knowledge construction during face to face collaborative writing. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in writing: Vol. 28, Writing as a learning activity (pp. 277-299). The Netherlands: Brill.
  138. Nystrand, M. (2006). The social and historical context for writing research. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 11-27). New York: The Guilford Press.
  139. Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A., & Carbonaro, W. (2001). On the ecology of classroom instruction. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason & K. Lonka (Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 57-81). Dordrecht: Kluwer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978- 94-010-0740-5_5 · DOI
  140. Olson, D. R. (1994). The world on paper: The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and reading. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  141. Olson, D. R. (2001). Literate minds: Literate societies. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 1-5). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  142. Olson, D. R. (2014). Schooling and literacy in mind and society. In A. Antonietti, E. Confalonieri, & A. Marchetti (Eds.), Reflective thinking in educational settings (pp. 227-242). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  143. Ong, J. (2013). Discovery of ideas in second language writing task environment. System, 41, 529- 542. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.05.001 · DOI
  144. Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy. New York, NY: Methuen, Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/ 9780203328064 · DOI
  145. Ortoleva, G., & Bétrancourt, M. (2015). Collaborative writing and discussion in vocational education: Effects on learning and self-efficacy beliefs. Journal of Writing Research, 7(1), 95- 122. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2015.07.01.05 · DOI
  146. Penrose, A. M. (1992). To write or not to write: Effects of task and task interpretation on learning through writing. Written Communication, 9, 465-500. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/07410883920 09004002 · DOI
  147. Prior, P. (2006). A sociocultural theory of writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of research on writing (pp. 54-66). New York: The Guilford Press.
  148. Reiss, D., Selfe, D., & Young, A. (Eds.) (1998). Electronic communication across the curriculum. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
  149. Reynolds, G. A., & Perin, D. (2009). A comparison of text structure and self-regulated writing strategies for composing from sources by middle school students. Reading Psychology, 30, 265-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02702710802411547 · DOI
  150. Rivard, L. P. (2004). Are language-based activities in science effective for all students, including low achievers? Science Education, 88, 420-442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.10114 · DOI
  151. Rivers, N. A. (2011). Future convergences: technical communication research as cognitive science. Technical Communication Quarterly, 20, 412-442. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 10572252.2011.591650 · DOI
  152. Robbins, P., & Aydede, M. (2009). A short primer on situated cognition. In M. Aydede & p. Robbins, (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of situated cognition (pp. 3-10).New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  153. Roelle, J., Krüger, S., Jansen, C., & Berthold, K. (2012). The use of solved example problems for fostering strategies of self-regulated learning in journal writing. Education Research International, 12, 14 pgs. doi:10.1155/2012/751625 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/751625 · DOI
  154. Rosaen, C. (1989). Writing in the content areas: Reaching its potential in the learning process. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Advances in research on teaching, Vol. 1 (pp. 153-189). Greenwich, CT: JAI press.
  155. Rosaen, C. L. (1990). Improving writing opportunities in elementary classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 90, 418-434. doi: 10.1086/461624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/461624 · DOI
  156. Russell, D. R. (1997). Writing and genre in higher education and workplaces: A review of studies that use cultural-historical activity theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4, 224-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327884mca0404_2 · DOI
  157. Russell, D. R. (2009). Uses of activity theory in written communication research. In A. Sannino, H. Daniels, & K. D. Gutierrez (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 40-52). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511 809989.004 · DOI
  158. Russell, D. R. (2013a). CHAT and students writing. In G. Wells & A. Edwards (Eds.), Pedagogy in higher education (pp. 73-88). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139035699.005 · DOI
  159. Sampson, V., Enderle, P., Grooms, J., & Witte, S. (2013). Writing to learn by learning to write during the school science laboratory: Helping middle and high school students develop argumentative writing skills as they learn core ideas. Science Education, 97, 643-670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.21069 · DOI
  160. Schriver, K. (2012). What we know about expertise in professional communication. In V. W. Berninger (Ed.), Past, present, and future contributions to cognitive writing research to cognitive psychology (pp. 275-312). New York: Psychology Press.
  161. Schwonke, R., Hauser, S., Nückles, M., & Renkl, A. (2006). Enhancing computer-supported writing of learning protocols by adaptive prompts. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 77-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.01.002 · DOI
  162. Schworm, S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Learning argumentation skills through the use of prompts for self- explaining examples. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 285-296. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.285 · DOI
  163. Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674433014 · DOI · Paper page
  164. Segev-Miller, R. (2007). Cognitive processes in discourse synthesis: The case of intertextual processing strategies. In M. Torrance, D. Galbraith, & L. Van Waes (Eds.), Writing and cognition: Research and application (pp. 231-250). Amsterdam: Elsevier. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/S1572-6304(2007)0000020016 · DOI
  165. Seixas, P. (1993). Historical understanding among adolescents in a multicultural setting. Curriculum Inquiry, 23, 301-327. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03626784.1993.11076127 · DOI
  166. Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 40-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.17763/ haer.78.1.v62444321p602101 Si, J., & Kim, D. (2011). How do instructional sequencing methods affect cognitive load, learning transfer, and learning time? Educational Research, 2, 1362-1372. · DOI
  167. Siebert, D., & Draper, R. J. (2008). Why content-area literacy messages do not speak to mathematics teachers: a critical content analysis. Literacy Research and Instruction, 47, 229- 245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19388070802300314 · DOI
  168. Slotte, V., & Lonka, K. (2001). Note taking and essay writing. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp.131-143). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0740-5_8 · DOI
  169. Smagorinsky, P. (1995). Constructing meaning in the disciplines: Reconceptualizing writing across the curriculum as composing across the curriculum. American Journal of Education, 103, 160- 184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/444095 · DOI
  170. Spivey, N. N. (1997). The constructivist metaphor. San Diego, Ca: Academic Press.
  171. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-425). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  172. Pare, N. Artemeva, M. Horne, & L. Yousoubova (Eds.), Writing in knowledge societies (pp. 3- 28). Fort Collins, Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse Press.
  173. Stotsky, S. (1995). The uses and limitations of personal or personalized writing in writing theory, research, and instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 758-776. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.2307/748197 · DOI
  174. Street, B. V. (1984). Literacy in theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  175. Suhor, C. (1984). Towards a semiotics-based curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16, 247- 257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0022027840160304 · DOI
  176. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4 · DOI · Paper page
  177. Syh-Jong, J. (2007). A study of students' construction of science knowledge: Talking and writing in a collaborative group. Educational Research, 49, 65-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00131880701200781 · DOI
  178. Taylor, J. C., Therrien, W. J., Kaldenberg, E., Watt, S., Chanlen, N., & Hand, B. (2012). Using an inquiry-based teaching approach to improve science outcomes for students with disabilities: Snapshot and longitudinal data. Journal of Science Education for Students with Disabilities, 15, 27-39. http://dx.doi.org/10.14448/jsesd.04.0003 · DOI
  179. Thompson, A. (1990). Thinking and writing in learning logs. In N. Atwell (Ed.), Coming to know: Writing to learn in the middle grades (pp. 35-51). Toronto, Canada: Irwin.
  180. Tynjälä, P. (2001). Writing, learning and the development of expertise in higher education. In P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 37-56). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0740-5_4 · DOI
  181. Tynjälä, P. (2008). Perspectives into learning at the workplace. Educational Research Review, 3, 130-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2007.12.001 · DOI
  182. Tynjälä, P., Mason, L. & Lonka, K. (2001). Writing as a learning tool: An introduction. In: P. Tynjälä, L. Mason, & K. Lonka (Vol. Eds.), Studies in Writing: Vol. 7. Writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 7-22). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0740-5 · DOI
  183. Unsworth, L. (2011). Multimodal semiotics: Functional analysis in contexts of education. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  184. Uzoglu, M. (2014). Determining the effects of using different writing activities on the academic achievements secondary school 7th grade students and their attitudes towards the course. Educational Research and Reviews, 9, 1065-1070. http://dx.doi.org/10.5897/ERR2014.1861 · DOI
  185. Van Drie, J., & Van Boxtel, C. (2008). Historical reasoning: Towards a framework for analyzing students' reasoning about the past. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 87-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9056-1 · DOI
  186. Van Drie, J., Van Boxtel, C., & Braaksma, M. (2014). Writing to engage students in historical reasoning. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in writing: Vol. 28, Writing as a learning activity (pp. 94-119). The Netherlands: Brill. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1163/9789004265011_006 · DOI
  187. Vasquez, V. M. (2014). Negotiating critical literacies with young children. Routledge.
  188. Wade, R. C., & Yarbrough, D. B. (1996). Portfolios: A tool for reflective thinking in teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 63-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0742- 051X(95)00022-C Walvoord, B. E., Hunt, L.L., Dowling, H.F., McMahon, J.D., Slachman, V., & Udel,L. (1997). In the Long Run: A Study of Faculty in Three Writing-Across-The-Curriculum Programs. Urbana, IL.: National Council of Teachers of English. · DOI
  189. Wäschle, K., Gebhardt, A., Oberbusch, E. M., & Nückles, M. (2015). Journal writing in science: Effects on comprehension, interest, and critical reflection. Journal of Writing Research, 7(1), 41-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2015.07.01.03 · DOI
  190. Wäschle, K., Lehmann, T., Brauch, N., & Nückles, M. (2015). Prompted journal writing supports preservice history teachers in drawing on multiple knowledge domains for designing learning tasks. Peabody Journal of Education, 90, 546-559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0161956X. 2015.1068084 · DOI
  191. Wiley, J. & Voss, J. F. (1996). The effects of 'playing historian' on learning in history. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10 (Special issue), S63-S72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099- 0720(199611)10:7<63::AID-ACP438>3.0.CO;2-5 · DOI
  192. Wiley, J., & Voss, J. F. (1999). Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 301-311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.2.301 · DOI
  193. Wiley, J. B., Steffens, B., Britt, A. M., & Griffin, T. (2014). Writing to learn from multiple-source inquiry activities in history writing as a learning activity. In P. D. Klein, P. Boscolo, L. C. Kirkpatrick, & C. Gelati (Eds.), Studies in writing: Vol. 28, Writing as a learning activity (pp. 120-148). The Netherlands: Brill.
  194. Wineburg, S. S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
  195. Wong, B. Y., Kuperis, S., Jamieson, D., Keller, L., & Cull-Hewitt, R. (2002). Effects of guided journal writing on students' story understanding. The Journal of Educational Research, 95, 179-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220670209596588 · DOI
  196. Yassin, Y. M., & Yong, B. C. S. (2013). The impact of writing-to-learn activity on learning biology: students' achievement and perceptions. Journal of Applied Research in Education, 17, 13-25.
  197. Yeh, K. H., & She, H. C. (2010). On-line synchronous scientific argumentation learning: Nurturing students' argumentation ability and conceptual change in science context. Computers & Education, 55, 586-602. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.020 · DOI
  198. Yildiz, A. (2012). Prospective teachers' comprehension levels of special relativity theory and the effect of writing for learning on achievement. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37, 15- 28. http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2012v37n12. · DOI
  199. Young, A., and Fulwiler, T. (Eds.). (1986). Writing across the disciplines: Research into practice. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton.
  200. Young, R., & Sullivan, P. (1984). Why write? A reconsideration. In R. J. Conners, L. S. Ede, & A. A. Lunsford (Eds.), Essays on classical rhetoric and modern discourse (pp. 215-225). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.

200 of 201 shown

Authors
Klein, P. D., & Boscolo, P.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Klein, P. D.
Venue
Journal of Writing Research
Publisher
ARLE (International Association for Research in L1 Education)
Published
2016-02
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
311-350
ISSN
  • 2030-1006 (ISSN-L)
  • 2294-3307
DOI
10.17239/jowr-2016.07.03.01
OpenAlex
W2414331059
Cited by
226
References
249
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
71.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of Writing Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Writing and Handwriting Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
writing to learn, student self-regulation, writing across the curriculum, writing in the disciplines, disciplinary genres

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review