Subjectivity and intersubjectivity in the teaching and learning of writing

Research in the Teaching of English

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 413-460

  Beck, Sarah W ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745752542     PISSN: 0034527X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Applebee, A. (Ed.). (1984). Contexts for learning to write: Studies of secondary school instruction, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
2. Applebee, A. (1993). Literature in the secondary school: Studies of curriculum and instruction in the United States. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
3. Ball, D. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education. 51, 241-247.
4. Bardine, B., Bardine, M., & Deegan, E. (2000). Beyond the red pen: Clarifying our role in the response process. English Journal, 90, 94-101.
5. Beach, R. (1999). Evaluating students' response strategies in writing about literature. In C. Cooper & L. Odell (Eds.), Evaluating writing. The role of teachers' knowledge about text, learning, and culture (pp. 195-222). Urbana, IL: NCTE.
6. Beach, R., & Galda, L. (2001). Response to literature as a cultural activity. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 64-73.
7. Beach, R., & Marshall, J. (1991). Teaching literature in the secondary school. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
8. Bohman, J. F., Hiley, D. R., & Shusterman, R. (1991). The interpretive turn. In D. R. Hiley, J. F. Bohman, & R. Shusterman (Eds.), The interpretive turn (pp. 1-16). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
9. Brennan, R., Kim, J., Wenz-Gross, M., & Siperstein, G. (2001). The relative equitability of high-stakes testing versus teacher-assigned grades: An analysis of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS). Harvard Educational Review, 71, 173-216.
10. Britton, J., Burgess, T., Martin, N., McLeod, A., & Rosen, H. (1975). The development of writing abilities (11-18). London: Macmillan Education.
11. Bruffee, K. (1980). A short course in writing. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
12. Cairney, T. (1992). Mountain or mole hill: The genre debate viewed from "Down Under." Reading, 26, 23-29.
13. Callaghan, M., Knapp, P., & Noble, G. (1993). Genre in practice. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 179-202). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
14. Carter, M., Ferzli, M., & Wiebe, E. (2004). Teaching genre to English first-language adults: A study of the laboratory report. Research in the Teaching of English, 38, 395-419.
15. Cazden, C. (1982). Contexts for literacy: In the mind and in the classroom. Journal of Reading Behavior, 14, 413-427.
16. Cazden, C. (1996). Selective traditions: Readings of Vygotsky in writing pedagogy. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp. 165-185). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17. Cheng, X., & Steffensen, M. (1996). Metadiscourse: A technique for improving student writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 30, 49-181.
18. Christie, F. (1986). Writing in schools: Generic structures as ways of meaning. In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional approaches to writing (pp. 221-240). London: Frances Pinter.
19. Christie, F. (1993). Curriculum genres: Planning for effective teaching. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing (pp. 154-178). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
20. Cooper, C. (1999). What we know about genres, and how it can help us assign and evaluate writing. In C. Cooper & L. Odell (Eds.), Evaluating writing: The role of teachers' knowledge about text, learning, and culture (pp. 23-52). Urbana, IL: NCTE.
21. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (1993). The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching writing. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
22. Daiker, D. (1989). Learning to praise. In C. Anson (Ed.), Writing and response: Theory, practice, and research (pp. 103-113). Urbana, IL: NCTE.
23. Durst, R. (1984). The development of analytic writing. In A. Applebee (Ed.), Contexts for learning to write: Studies of secondary school instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
24. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.
25. Eggins, S. (1994). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Pinter.
26. Ely, M., Vinz, R., Downing, M., & Anzul, M. (1997). On writing qualitative research: Living by words. London: Falmer Press.
27. Farr, M. (1993). Essayist literacy and other verbal performances. Written Communication, 10, 4-38.
28. Gee, J. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
29. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
30. Gere, A., Christenbury, L., & Sassi, K. (2005). Writing on demand: Best practices and strategies for success. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
31. Giorgi, A. (1985). Sketch of a psychological phenomenological method. In A. Giorgi (Ed.), Phenomenology and psychological research (pp. 8-21). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.
32. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
33. Goetz, J. P., & Lecompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press.
34. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.
35. Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5, 93-116.
36. Hansberry, L. (1959). A raisin in the sun. New York: Vintage Books.
37. Harris, W. H. (1977). Teacher response to student writing: A study of the response patterns of high school teachers in order to determine the basis for teacher judgment of student writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 11, 175-185.
38. Hemphill, L. (1999). Narrative style, social class and response to literature. Research in the Teaching of English, 33, 275-302.
39. Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. (1997). An investigation of the functions, strategies and linguistic features of the introductions and conclusions of essays. System, 25, 479-495.
40. Hillocks, G. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
41. Johnson, S., Linton, P., & Madigan, R. (1994). The role of internal standards in assessment of written discourse. Discourse Processes, 18, 231-245.
42. Kamberelis, G. (1999). Genre development and learning: Children writing stories, science reports, and poems. Research in the Teaching of English, 33, 403-460.
43. Kaufman, B. (1986). Sunday in the park. In R. Shapard & J. Thomas (Eds.), Sudden fiction: American short-short stories (pp. 20-23). Salt Lake City, UT: Peregrine Books.
44. Ketter, J., & Pool, J. (2001). Exploring the impact of a high-stakes direct writing assessment in two high school classrooms. Research in the Teaching of English, 35, 344-393.
45. Kozulin, A. (1993). Literature as a psychological tool. Educational Psychologist, 28, 253-264.
46. Langer, J. (1995). Envisioning literature: Literary understanding and literature instruction. New York: Teachers College Press.
47. Lemke, J. (1988). Genres, semantics and classroom education. Linguistics and Education, 1, 81-99.
48. Martin, J. R. (1989). Factual writing: Exploring and challenging social reality. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
49. Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. Michaels, S. (1987). Text and context: A new approach to the study of classroom writing. Discourse Processes, 10, 321-346.
51. Milenski, P. (1986). Tickits. In R. Shapard & J. Thomas (Eds.), Sudden fiction: American short-short stories (pp. 155-157). Salt Lake City, UT: Peregrine Books.
52. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
53. Moss, P. (1996). Enlarging the dialogue in educational measurement: Voices from interpretive research traditions. Educational Researcher, 25, 20-28, 43.
54. Murphy, S. (2000). A sociocultural perspective on teacher response: Is there a student in the room? Assessing Writing, 7, 79-90.
55. Murphy, S., Bergamini, J., & Rooney, P. (1997). The impact of large-scale portfolio assessment programs on classroom practice: Case studies of the new standards field-trial portfolio. Educational Assessment, 4, 297-333.
56. Newell, G. (1994). The effects of written between-draft responses on students' writing and reasoning about literature. Written Communication, 11, 311-347.
57. Newkirk, T. (1984a). How students read student papers: An exploratory study. Written Communication, 1, 283-305.
58. Newkirk, T. (1984b). Direction and misdirection in peer response. College Composition and Communication, 35, 301-311.
59. Olson, D. (2003). Psychological theory and educational reform: How school remakes mind and society. New York: Cambridge University Press.
60. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
61. Purves, A. & Beach, R. (1972). Literature and the reader: Research in response to literature, reading interests, and the teaching of literature. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
62. Rex, L. A., & McEachen, D. (1999). "If anything is odd, inappropriate, confusing, or boring, it's probably important": The emergence of inclusive academic literacy through English classroom discussion practices. Research in the Teaching of English, 34, 65-129.
63. Rommetveit, R. (1974). On message structure. London: John Wiley & Sons.
64. Rosenblatt, L. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
65. Schmidt, P. (2000, January 21). Colleges prepare for the fallout from state testing policies. Chronicle of Higher Education, 26, A26-A28.
66. Scholes, R. (1985). Textual power. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
67. Shakespeare, W. (1960). Romeo and Juliet. New York: Penguin Books.
68. Silko, L. M. (1991). The man to send rain clouds. In W. Brown & A. Ling (Eds.), Imagining America (pp. 191-195). New York: Persea Books.
69. Spalding, E. (2000). Performance assessment and the New Standards Project: A story of serendipitous success. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 758-764.
70. Sperling, M., & Freedman, S. W. (1987). A good girl writes like a good girl: Written response to student writing. Written Communication, 4, 343-369.
71. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
72. Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
73. Ulichny, P., & Watson-Gegeo, K. (1989). Interactions and authority: The dominant interpretive framework in writing conferences. Discourse Processes, 12, 309-328.
74. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of the higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
75. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
76. Wilhelm, J. (1997). You gotta BE the book. New York: Teachers College Press.
77. Williams, J., Lauer, K., Hall, K., Lord, K., Gugga, S., Bak, S., & Jacobs, P. (2002). Teaching elementary school students to identify story themes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 235-248.
78. Wolcott, W. (1998). An overview of writing assessment: Theory, research, and practice. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
79. Wollman-Bonilla, J. E. (2000). Teaching science writing to first graders: Genre learning and recontextualization. Research in the Teaching of English, 35, 35-65.
80. Wyatt-Smith, C. (1997). Teaching and assessing writing: An Australian perspective. English in Education, 31(3), 8-22.
81. Yeh, S. (1998). Empowering education: Teaching argumentative writing to cultural minority middle-school students. Research in the Teaching of English, 33, 49-83.