Writing for whom? Cognition, motivation, and a writer's audience

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 167-184

  Magnifico, Alecia Marie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954708147     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2010.493470     Document Type: Article

References (107)

1. Alamargot, D., & Chanquoy, L. (2001). Through the models of writing. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
2. Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
3. Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). Motivation and schooling in the middle grades. Review of Educational Research, 64, 287-309.
4. Applebee, A. (1996). Curriculum as conversation: Transforming traditions of teaching and learning. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5. Applebee, A., & Langer, J. (2006). The state of writing instruction in America's schools: What existing data tell us. Albany, NY: Center on English Learning & Achievement, University at SUNY, Albany. Retrieved from http://www.albany.edu/cela/reports.html
6. Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
7. Bakhtin, M. (1994). Discourse in life and discourse in art (I. R. Titunik, Trans.). In P. Elbow (Ed.), Landmark essays: Voice and writing (pp. 3-10). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press. (Reprinted from Freudianism: A Marxist. critique, by V. N. Volosinov, trans. I. R. Titunik, Ed. in collaboration with N. H. Bruss, 1976, New York, NY: Academic Press)
8. Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., & Bransford, J. D. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 271-311.
9. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Berkenkotter, C. (1981). Understanding a writer's awareness of audience. College Composition and Communication, 32, 388-391.
11. Bitzer, L. F. (1999). The rhetorical situation. In J. L. Lucaites, C. M. Condit, & S. Caudill, (Eds.), Contemporary rhetorical theory: A reader. New York, NY: Guilford Press. (Reprinted from Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1(1),1968, pp. 1-14).
12. Black, R. (2008). Adolescents and online fan fiction. New York: Peter Lang.
13. Boscolo, P., & Hidi, S. (2007). The multiple meanings of motivation to write. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and P. Boscolo & S. Hidi (Vol. Eds.), Studies in writing, Vol. 19, Writing and motivation (pp. 1-14). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
14. Bourdin, B., & Fayol, M. (1994). Is written language production more difficult than oral language production? A working memory approach. International Journal of Psychology, 29, 591-620.
15. boyd, d. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of net-worked publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation series on digital learning, Identity volume (pp. 119-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Brandt, D. (1990). Literacy as involvement: The acts of readers, writers, and texts. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
17. Brandt, D. (1992). The cognitive as the social: An ethnomethodological approach to writing process research. Written Communication, 9, 315-355.
18. Brandt, D. (2001). Literacy in American lives. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
19. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289-325). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21. Calkins, L. M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
22. Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
23. Cohen, M., & Riel, M. (1989). The effect of distal audiences on students' writing. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 143-159.
24. College Entrance Examination Board. (2003). The neglected "r:" The need for a writing revolution. In The Report of the National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. Retrieved from http://www.writingcommission.org/report.html
25. College Entrance Examination Board. (2004). Writing: A ticket to work... or a ticket out. A survey of business leaders. In The Report of the National Commission on Writing for America's Families, Schools, and Colleges. Retrieved from http://www.writingcommission.org/pr/writing for employ.html
26. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
27. Covington, M. V. (1983). Motivated cognitions. In S. Paris, G. Olson, & H. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp. 139-164). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Cumming, A., Kim, T. Y., & Eouanzoui, K. B. (2007). Motivations for ESL writing improvement in pre-university contexts. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and P. Boscolo & S. Hidi (Vol. Eds.), Studies in writing, Vol. 19, Writing and motivation (pp. 93-112). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
29. De La Paz, S., & Graham, S. (2002). Explicitly teaching strategies, skills, and knowledge: Writing instruction in middle school classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 687-698.
30. Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. Harvard Education Review, 58, 280-298.
31. Delpit, L. (2006). Lessons from teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 57, 220-231.
32. Dole, J. A., & Sinatra, G. M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 33, 109-128.
33. Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256-273.
34. Dyson, A. H. (1997). Writing superheroes: Contemporary childhood, popular culture and classroom literacy. New York, NY: Teacher's College Press.
35. Eccles, J. (1983). Expectancies, values and academic behaviors. In J. T. Spence (Ed.), Achievement and achievement motives (pp. 75-146). San Francisco, CA: Freeman.
36. Elbow, P. (1987). Closing my eyes as I speak: An argument for ignoring audience. College English, 49(1), 50-69.
37. Emig, J. (1994). Writing as a mode of learning. In R.E. Young & Y. Liu (Eds.), Landmark essays: Rhetorical invention in writing (pp. 91-98). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press. (Reprinted from College Composition and Communication, 28(2), 1977, pp. 122-128).
38. Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102, 211-245.
39. Fishman, J., Lunsford, A., McGregor, B., & Otuteye, M. (2005). Performing writing, performing literacy. College Composition and Communication, 57,224-252.
40. Flower, L. (1979). Writer-based prose: A cognitive basis for problems in writing. College English, 41, 19-37.
41. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1980). The cognition of discovery: Defining a rhetorical problem. College Composition and Communication, 31, 21-32.
42. Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
43. Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How children think and how schools should teach. New York: Basic Books.
44. Gee, J. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies (2nd ed.). Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
45. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York, NY: Palgrave-Macmillan.
46. Gibson, W. (1950). Authors, speakers, readers, and mock readers. College English, 11, 265-269.
47. Gilbert, B. (2001). Designing a town-based writing project. The English Journal, 90(5), 88-94.
48. Halverson, E. H. (2005). InsideOut: Facilitating gay youth identity development through a performance-based youth organization. Identity: An International Journal of Theory and Research, 5(1), 67-90.
49. Harackiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Rethinking achievement goals: When are they adaptive for college students and why? Educational Psychologist, 33, 1-21.
50. Hayes, J. R. (2001). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In E. Cushman, E. R. Kintgen, B. M. Kroll, & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy, a critical sourcebook (pp. 172-198). Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin.
51. Hayes, J. R., & Chenoweth, N. A. (2006). Is working memory involved in the transcribing and editing of texts? Written Communication, 23, 135-149.
52. Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1994). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In R.E. Young & Y. Liu (Eds.), Landmark essays: Rhetorical invention in writing (pp. 153-179). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press. (Reprinted from Cognitive processes in writing [pp. 3-30], by L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg, Eds., 1980, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum).
53. Heath, S. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
54. Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41, 111-127.
55. Hidi, S., Renninger, K. A., & Krapp, A. (1992). The present state of interest research. In K. A. Renninger, S. Hidi, & A. Krapp (Eds.), The role of interest in learning and development (pp. 433-446). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. Hillocks, G. (2002). The testing trap: How state writing assessments control learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
57. Hillocks, G. (2003). Fighting back: Assessing the assessments. The English Journal, 92(4), 63-70.
58. Illinois State Board of Education. (2007). Illinois writing assessment framework. In Student Assessment: Illinois Assessment Frameworks. Retrieved from http://www.isbe.state.il.us/assessment/IAFIndex.htm
59. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York, NY: NYU Press.
60. Kellogg, R. T. (2001). Competition for working memory among writing processes. The American Journal of Psychology, 114, 175-191.
61. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2007). Sampling the "new" in new literacies. In M. Knobel & C. Lankshear (Eds.), A new literacies sampler (pp. 1-24). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
62. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
63. Leander, K. M., & Lovvorn, J. F. (2006). Literacy networks: Following the circulation of texts, bodies, and objects in the schooling and online gaming of one youth. Cognition & Instruction, 24, 291-340.
64. Lenhart, A., Arafeh, S., Smith, A., & Macgill, A. (2008). Writing, technology, and teens. In PEW Internet and the American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/Writing-Technology-and-Teens.aspx
65. Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2007). Social networking websites and teens: An overview. In PEW Internet and the American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/198/report display.asp
66. Lipstein, R. L., & Renninger, K. A. (2007). Putting things into words: The development of 12-15-year-old students' interest for writing. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) & P. Boscolo & S. Hidi (Vol. Eds.), Studies in writing, Volume 19, Writing and motivation (pp. 113-140). Oxford, England: Elsevier.
67. Lunsford, A. A. (2006). Writing, technologies, and the fifth canon. Computers and Composition, 23, 169-177.
68. Lunsford, A. A. (2008). Mistakes are a fact of life: A national comparative study. College Composition and Communication, 59, 781-806.
69. Mabry, L. (1999). Writing to the Rubric: Lingering effects of traditional standardized testing on direct writing assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 673-680.
70. Maehr, M. (1983). On doing well in science: Why Johnny no longer excels, why Sarah never did. In S. Paris, G. Olson, & H. Stevenson (Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom (pp. 179-210). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
71. Moje, E. B., Overby, M., Tysvaer, N., & Morris, K. (2008). The complex world of adolescent literacy: Myths, motivations, and mysteries. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 107-154.
72. Murray, D. M. (2004). A writer teaches writing. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
73. National Assessment Governing Board. (2007). Writing framework and specifications for the 2007 National Assessement of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/writing/whatmeasure.asp.
74. New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92.
75. New York State Education Department. (2009). Specifications for the new three-hour, one-day Regents comprehensive examination in English: First administration January 2011. In State Assessment: High School English Language Arts. Retrieved from http://www.emsc.nysed. gov/osa/hseng.html
76. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, Education Northwest. (n.d.).6 + 1 Trait writing: Trait definitions. Retrieved from http://educationnorthwest.org/resource/503
77. Nystrand, M. (1982). Rhetoric's "audience" and linguistics' "speech community": Implications for understanding writing, reading, and text. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 1-28). New York, NY: Academic Press.
78. Nystrand, M., Gamoran, A., Kachur, R., & Prendergast, C. (Eds.). (1997). Opening dialogue: Understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
79. Nystrand, M., & Graff, N. (2001). Report in argument's clothing: An ecological perspective on writing instruction in a seventh-grade classroom. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 479-493.
80. Ong, W. (1975). The writer's audience is always a fiction. Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 90(1), 9-21.
81. Park, D. B. (1986). Analyzing audience. College Composition and Communication, 37, 478-488.
82. Park, D. B. (1994). The meanings of "audience." In R. E. Young & Y. Liu (Eds.), Landmark essays: Rhetorical invention in writing (pp. 153-179). Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press. (Reprinted from College English, 44, 1982, pp. 247-257)
83. Pintrich, P. R. (1999a). Motivational beliefs as resources for and constraints on conceptual change. In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspectives on conceptual change (pp. 33-50). Oxford, England: Elsevier Science.
84. Pintrich, P. R. (1999b). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31,459-470.
85. Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63 167-199.
86. Pintrich, P. R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom academic tasks. In D. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences (pp. 149-183). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
87. Piolat, A., Kellogg, R. T., & Farioli, F. (2001). The triple task technique for studying writing processes: On which task is attention focused? Current Psychology Letters, 4(1), 67-83.
88. Piolat, A., & Roussey, J. Y. (1996). Students' drafting strategies and text quality. Learning and Instruction, 6, 111-129.
89. Porter, J. E. (1996). Audience. In T. Enos (Ed.), Encyclopedia of rhetoric and composition: Communication from ancient times to the information age (p. 43). New York, NY: Routledge.
90. Pressley, M. (2005). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford.
91. Prior,P.A.(1998).Writing/Disciplinarity:Asociohistoricaccountofliterate activity in the academy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
92. Purcell-Gates, V., Duke, N. K., & Martineau, J. A. (2007) Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42, 8-45.
93. Putnam, D. (2001). Authentic writing using online resources: Selling our words in the community. The English Journal, 90(5), 102-106.
94. Roth, R. G. (1987). The evolving audience: Alternatives to audience accommodation. College Composition and Communication, 38, 47-55.
95. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Goelman, H. (1982). The role of production factors in writing ability. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 173-210). New York, NY: Academic Press.
96. Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
97. Shaffer, D. W. (2005). Epistemic games. Innovate, 1(6). Retrieved from http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view-article&id=79.
98. Shaffer, D. W. (2007). How computer games help children learn. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
99. Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. D., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Video games and the future of learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 87, 104-111.
100. Squire, K. D. (2005). Changing the game: What happens when video games enter the classroom? Innovate, 1(6).
101. Steinkuehler, C. A., & Duncan, S. C. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 530-543.
102. Stubbs, M. (1982). Written language and society: Some particular cases and observations. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse (pp. 31-55). New York, NY: Academic Press.
103. Svarovsky, G. N., & Shaffer, D. W. (2007). SodaConstructing knowledge through exploratoids. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 133-153.
104. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
105. Wallace, D. L., Hayes, J. R., Hatch, J. A., Miller, W., Moser, G., & Silk, C. M. (1996). Better revision in eight minutes? Prompting first-year college writers to revise globally. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 682-688.
106. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
107. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265-310.