Fourth Graders Composing Scientific Explanations About the Effects of Pollutants: Writing to Understand

Written Communication

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 426-454

  Chambliss, Marilyn J ^a   Christenson, Lea Ann ^a   Parker, Carolyn ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE COUNTY   (United States)

Author keywords

explanation; genre learning; writing across the curriculum; writing to understand

Indexed keywords

EID: 31344454495     PISSN: 07410883     EISSN: 15528472     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0741088303260504     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Anderson, T. H., Armbruster, B. B., & Kantor, R. N. (1980). How clearly written are children's textbooks? Or, of bladderworts and alfa(Reading Education Rep. No. 16). Urbana: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.
2. Ball, A. F. (1992). Cultural preferences and the expository writing of African American adolescents. Written Communication, 9, 501-532.
3. Baumann, J. F. (1986). Effect of rewritten content textbook passages on middle grade students’ comprehension of main ideas: Making the inconsiderate considerate. Journal of Reading Behavior, 18, 1-21.
4. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1993). Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective. Written Communication, 10, 475-509.
5. Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P. L., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in self-explanation and selfregulation strategies: Investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 221-252.
6. Calfee, R. C., & Chambliss, M. J. (1987). The structural design features of large texts. Educational Psychologist, 22, 357-378.
7. Chambliss, M. J. (2001). Analyzing textbook materials in science to determine how “persuasive” they are. Theory Into Practice, 40(4), 255-264.
8. Chambliss, M. J. (2002). The characteristics of well-designed science textbooks. In J. Otero, J. Leon,& A. Graesser (Eds.), Psychology of science text comprehension(pp. 51-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Chambliss, M. J.,& Calfee, R. C. (1998). Textbooks for learning: Nurturing children's minds. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
10. Chapman, M. L. (1994). The emergence of genres: Some findings from an examination of first-grade writing. Written Communication, 11, 348-380.
11. Chapman, M. L. (1999). Situated, social, active: Rewriting genre in the elementary classroom. Written Communication, 16, 469-490.
12. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P.,& Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
13. Chi, M. T. H., deLeeuw, N., Chiu, M.,& LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18, 439-477.
14. Connors, R. J. (1985). The rhetoric of explanation: Explanatory rhetoric from 1850 to the present. Written Communication, 2, 49-72.
15. diSessa, A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-226.
16. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children's ideas and the learning of science. In R. Driver, E. Guesne,& A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children's ideas in science(pp. 1-9, 193-201). Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
17. Frederiksen, C. H. (1975). Representing logical and semantic structure of knowledge acquired from discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 371-458.
18. Freedman, A. (1996). Genres of argument and arguments as genres. In D. P. Berrill (Ed.), Perspectives on written argument(pp. 91-120). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
19. Goldman, S. R.,& Bisanz, G. L. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension(pp. 19-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Hunt, K. (1965). Grammatical structures written at three grade levels. Champaign, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
21. Hunt, K. (1970). A syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society of Research in Child Development, 35(Serial No. 134).
22. Hurd, P. D., Robinson, J. T., McConnell, M. C.,& Ross, N. M., Jr. (1981). The status of middle school and junior high school science. Louisville, KY: Center for Educational Research and Evaluation.
23. Klein, P. D. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11, 203-270.
24. Klein, P. D. (2000). Elementary students’ strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 317-348.
25. Meyer, B. J. F. (1985). Prose analysis: Purposes, procedures, and problems (Pt. 1 and 2). In B. K. Britton & J. B. Black (Eds.), Understanding expository text(pp. 11-64, 269-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26. Meyer, K.,& Woodruff, E. (1997). Consensually driven explanation in science teaching. Science Education, 80, 173-192.
27. National Science Resources Center/Science & Technology for Children. (1994). Ecosystems. Washington, DC: Author.
28. National Science Resources Center/Science & Technology for Children. (1996). Ecosystems: Student activity book. Washington, DC: Author.
29. Nelson, N., & Calfee, R. C. (Eds.). (1998). The reading-writing connection. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Newell, G. E. (1998).“How much arewe the wiser?”: Continuity and change in writing and learning in the content areas. In N. Nelson & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), The readingwriting connection: Ninety-seventh yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education(Pt. 2, pp. 178-202). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
31. Newell, G. E.,& Winograd, P. (1989). The effects of writing on learning fromexpository text. Written Communication, 6, 196-217.
32. Newell, G. E.,& Winograd, P. (1995). Writing about and learning fromhistory texts: The effects of task and academic ability. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 133-163.
33. Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I., & McGillicuddy, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
34. Polio, C. G. (1997). Measures of linguistic accuracy in second languagewriting research. Language Learning, 47, 101-143.
35. Rowan, K. E. (1988). Acontemporary theory of explanatory writing. Written Communication, 5, 23-56.
36. Rowan, K. E. (1990). Cognitive correlates of explanatory writing skill: An analysis of individual differences. Written Communication, 7, 316-341.
37. Stein, N. L., & Glenn, C. G. (1979). An analysis of story comprehension in elementary school children. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing(pp. 53-120). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
38. Trabasso, T., Suh, S., Payton, P.,& Jain, R. (1995). Explanatory inferences and other strategies during comprehension and their effect on recall. In R. F. Lorch, Jr. & E. J. O’Brien (Eds.), Sources of coherence in reading(pp. 219-239). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39. Unsworth, L. (2001). Evaluating the language of different types of explanations in junior high school science texts. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 585-609.
40. Warren, W. H., Nicholas, D. W., & Trabasso, T. (1979). Event chains and inferences in understanding narratives. In R. O. Freedle (Ed.), New directions in discourse processing(pp. 23-52). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.