The effects of content and audience awareness goals for revision on the persuasive essays of fifth- and eighth-grade students

Reading and Writing

Volumn 21, Issue 1-2, 2008, Pages 131-151

  Midgette, Ekaterina ^a   Haria, Priti ^a   MacArthur, Charles ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE   (United States)

Author keywords

Argument; Audience; Goals; Revision; Writing

Indexed keywords

EID: 38949115629     PISSN: 09224777     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11145-007-9067-9     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Applebee, A. N., Langer, J. A., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foertsch, M. A. (1990). Learning to write in our nation's schools: Instruction and achievement in 1988 at grades 4, 8, and 12. Princeton, NJ: Education Testing Service.
2. Beach, R., & Friedrich, T. (2006). Response to writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 222-234). New York: Guilford.
3. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Black, K. (1989). Audience analysis and persuasive writing at the college level. Research in the Teaching of English, 23, 231-249.
5. Boscolo, P., & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children's ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanqouy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
6. Brassart, D. G. (1992). Negotiation, concession, and refutation in counterargumentative composition by pupils from 8 to 12 years old and adult. Argumentation, 6, 77-98.
7. Butterfield, E. C., Hacker, D. J., & Albertson, R. L. (1996). Environmental, cognitive, and metacognitive influences on text revision: Assessing the evidence. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 239-297.
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Coirier, P., Andriessen, J., & Chanquoy, L. (1999). From planning to translating: The specificity of argumentative writing. In J. Andriessen, & P. Coirier (Eds.), Foundation of argumentative text processing (pp. 1-28). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
10. DiPardo, A., & Freedman, S. W. (1988). Peer response groups in the writing classroom: Theoretic foundations and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 58, 119-149.
11. Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A., & Dowdy, N. S. (2000). The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 694-702.
12. Fitzgerald, J. (1987). Research on revision in writing. Review of Educational Research, 57, 481-506.
13. Fitzgerald, J., & Stamm, C. (1990). Effects of group conferences on first graders' revision in writing. Written Communication, 7, 96-135.
14. Flower, L. S., & Hayes, J.R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L. W. Gregg, & E. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 31-49). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Golder, C., & Coirier, P. (1994). Argumentative text writing: Developmental trends. Discourse Processes, 18, 187-210.
16. Graham, S., MacArthur, C. A., & Schwartz, S. (1995). Effects of goal setting and procedural facilitation on the revising behavior and writing performance of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 230-240.
17. Graves, D. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann.
18. Greenwald, E., Persky, H., Campbell, J., & Mazzeo, J. (1999). National assessment of educational progress: 1998 report card for the nation and the states. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
19. Hayes, J. R. (2004). What triggers revision? In L. Allal, & L. Chanquoy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 9-20). Norwell, NJ: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
20. Hayes, J. R., Flower, L. S., Schriver, K. A., Stratman, J., & Carey, L. (1987). Cognitive processes in revision. In S. Rosenberg (Ed.), Advances in psycholinguistics: Vol.2. Reading, writing, and language processing (pp. 176-240). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Holliway, R. D., & McCutchen, D. (2004). Audience perspective in young writers' composing, revising. In L. Allal, L. Chanquoy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (pp. 157-170). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
22. Inch, E. S., & Warnick, B. (2002). Critical thinking and communication: The use of reason in argument (4th ed.) Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
23. Kanaris, A. (1999). Gendered journeys: Children's writing and the construction of gender. Language and Education, 13, 254-268.
24. MacArthur, C. A. (2007). Best practices in teaching evaluation and revision. In S. Graham, C. A. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 141-162). New York: Guilford.
25. MacArthur, C. A., Schwartz, S. S., & Graham, S. (1991). Effects of a reciprocal revision strategy in special education classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research, 6, 201-210.
26. Maki, H. S., Voeten, M. J. M., Vauras, M. S. M., & Poskiparta, E. H. (2001). Predicting writing skill development with word recognition and preschool readiness skills. Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 643-672.
27. Matsuhashi, A., & E. Gordon (1985). Revision, addition, and the power of unseen text. In S. Freedman (Ed.), The acquisition of written language: Response and revision. (pp. 236-249). Norwood, NJ, Ablex.
28. McCutchen, D., Francis, M., & Kerr, S. (1997). Revising for meaning: Effects of knowledge and strategy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 667-676.
29. Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 157-169.
30. Persky, H., Daane, M., & Jin, Y. (2003). The nation's report card: Writing. Washington, DC: US Department of Education.
31. Piolat, A., Roussey, J., & Gombert, A. (1999). The development of argumentative schema in writing. In J. Andriessen, & P. Coirier (Eds.), Foundation of argumentative text processing (pp. 117-136). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
32. Pritchard, R. J., & Honeycutt, R. L. (2007). Best practices in implementing a process approach to writing. In S. Graham, C. A. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 28-49). New York: Guilford.
33. Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (2001). Argumentation and critical decision making (5th ed.). New York: Longman.
34. Roen, D. H., & Willey, R. J. (1988). The effects of audience awareness on drafting and revising. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 75-85.
35. Roussey, J. Y., & Gombert, A. (1996). Improving argumentative writing skills: Effect of two types of aids. Argumentation, 10, 283-300.
36. Stoddard, B., & MacArthur, C. A. (1993). A peer editor strategy: Guiding learning-disabled students in response and revision. Research in Teaching of English, 27, 76-103.
37. Willingham, W. W., Cole, N. S., Lewis, C., & Leung, S. W. (1997). Test performance. In W. W. Willingham, & N. S. Cole (Eds.). Gender and fair assessment (pp. 55-126). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Wong, B. Y. L., Butler, D. L., Ficzere, S. A., Kuperis, S., Corden, M., & Zelmer, J. (1994). Teaching problem learners revision skills and sensitivity to audience through two instructional modes: Student-teacher versus student-student interactive dialogues. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 78-90.