writing-to-learn in the process of researching

CHAPTER 3

WRITING-TO-LEARN IN THE PROCESS OF RESEARCHING Maureen Boyd

You ask yourself, “How am I going to get my research project into a polished, publishable state?” You look at a published article and see that the context and content are well matched, the research is well supported, and the results lead to meaningful insights. But that article represents the end of the research process. In this chapter I talk about the beginning of the research process. I discuss types of writing you can do before your first draft of that published manuscript. I present my dissertation experience with a mentor whose experience in raising questions prompted my writing to learn. This chapter is about writing in the process of researching that is not Au: Decision intended for publication but rather intended to help “order and repre- making is two sent experience to our own understanding” (Fulwiler & Young, 1982, words in p. x). Not only does writing create texts that “explore relationships Webster’s. But decision-making between ideas” (Klein, 1999, p. 204), the process of writing can help process. shape and clarify decision making and provide a paper audit trail (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) of your thinking which can help you get your research into a polished, publishable state. WRITING-TO-LEARN The role writing can play in learning is explored in the writing-to-learn literature (Bangert-Drowns, Hurley, & Wilkinson, 2004; Britton, 1972; Writing for Educators: Personal Essays and Practical Advice, pp. 21–31 Copyright © 2009 by Information Age Publishing All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

21

22 M. BOYD

Emig, 1977; Fulwiler & Young, 1982; Gammill, 2006; Klein, 1999; Langer & Applebee, 1987). We write for different purposes. When we write to express, we focus on the writer’s experience. When we write to communicate, we focus on the reader’s experience. But all writing starts “close to the self ” as expressive writing; writing that is closest to thinking (Britton, 1972). Expressive writing is where we frame and express emerging understanding and construct new ideas. Writing-tolearn is thinking on paper and seeks to clarify, rehearse, stretch, question what we understand, and identify what we do not know. Our audience is not public and so we can safely explore and express our ideas. Writing-to-learn does not go through the revision and editing process because its purpose as writing is fulfilled through the writing itself. The writing becomes the catalyst for further learning and meaning making. A review of the cognitive processes involved in writing-to-learn identifies four hypotheses that all connect writing with exploring relationships among ideas (Klein, 1999). Whether we make new connections, generate new ideas, or write to articulate a relationship, support an opinion or evaluate a text, once on paper, writing becomes a “forward thrust” (Klein, Au: Cite the page 1999) as we deliberately reflect on what is written. As we consciously struc- numbers of these ture writing in particular genres, we recast or further understand relation- quotes, instead ships among ideas. The use of metaphor or the structure of poetry, for of citing the Klein example, requires a writer to organize, select and connect ideas in new source again. ways. Since written language requires an elaboration and articulation of knowledge there is a “backward search” (Klein, 1999) as we seek to make sense and communicate a coherent message to plan our writing to best represent that message. The role writing-to-learn plays in rehearsing and expressing content and fostering critical thinking in school settings is gaining research attention in mainstream education journals and texts (Bangert-Drowns, Hurley, & Wilkinson, 2004; Frey & Fisher, 2007; Gammill, 2006; Knipper & Duggan, 2006). Writing-to-learn takes many “pre-writing” forms (for example, journaling, graphic organizers, and quickwrites) that can serve to help the writer recall, respond, challenge, and engender thinking and understanding when accompanied with appropriate and challenging prompts and when practiced over time.

SEEING YOUR THOUGHTS Writing-to-learn should become a well-worn path to writing to communicate our research to a wider audience. Indeed, researchers recommend that early in the research process we “write down ideas rather than talk about them” because it is a way of seeing our thoughts (Cresswell, 2003,

Writing-To-Learn 23

p. 54). Writing-to-learn shapes our thinking just as seeing our thoughts helps us make connections between what we see, read, understand, and think (Langer & Applebee, 1987). Thus, writing-to-learn can be an integral part of the research process of making sense of a focal event and context (Goodwin & Duranti, 1992). It is a way to build a relationship with your research. Indeed, writing-to-learn is part of the data collection process, a kind of reflexive journal. It is a means for internal dialogue with research design and methods of data collection (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).

WRITING TO LEARN ABOUT MY RESEARCH When asked to write this chapter on the academic writing process, I was reminded of the powerful dual role my own writing-to-learn documents have played. First, the act of writing-to-learn shaped my thinking and enabled me to see my thoughts during the design and data collection process of my dissertation research. Second, the written record of these thoughts facilitated the writing of my dissertation and the crafting of subsequent articles, both based on and extending from this research (Boyd & Rubin, 2002, 2006). I have returned to my writing-to-learn documents to both recall and further understand observations of events and relationships noted during the data collection process. Upon reflection, my writing-to-learn falls into four categories: Au: In APA,

1. 2. 3. 4.

personal Writing as recording communications Writing as organizing are cited in text only. Can you Writing as reflecting provide a date? Writing as dialoguing with “an insistent other” (D. Rubin, personal communication).

Qualitative researchers conduct audit trails as they create and organize written records while they collect data. My writing-to-learn not only provided a record of what I observed, it also was a window to my thinking as I organized, reflected, and discussed ideas. Reflecting and composing at the point of utterance pushed me to further articulate what, until the point of writing, had been an internal process. It caused me to challenge my assumptions and reasoning. Reading primary documents, writing summary reports, graphically organizing what I understood, identifying gaps in my knowing, reflecting on and questioning what I observed further shaped my relationship with what I observed. Connections between what I saw, read, and understood were explored, affirmed, and challenged as I wrote to record, organize, reflect, and dialogue with an

24 M. BOYD

insistent other. Critical to this learning experience was the role of metaphors in structuring my thinking and learning.

METAPHORS AND WRITING-TO-LEARN Metaphors are important tools of cognition and communication (Ortony & Fainsilber, 1987). They enable us to conceptualize unfamiliar things in familiar ways or familiar things in unfamiliar ways. In that process of conceptualizing we can express our thinking in ways restricted by literal uses of language. Because writing-to-learn is thinking in writing to make sense of experience in relation to yourself, you can safely explore different metaphors to impose order to that experience. Indeed, exploring metaphors can provide a focusing image or remind us of a truth we do not want to forget as we write. In my writing-to-learn for my dissertation, two images shaped my thinking on paper: stepping into a river and constructing a chair. Following, I explore the metaphor of the river as a compact and familiar image to communicate the powerful role that writing-to-learn played in the process of researching.

THE RIGHT RIVER AT THE RIGHT LOCATION AT THE RIGHT TIME: SELECTING A CLASSROOM FOR RESEARCH “I know you are aware of what is at stake here. You can never step into the same river of data twice. One of the functions of a carefully thought out prospectus is to maximize the probability that you are stepping into the right river and the right location at the right time” —D. Rubin (personal communication)

The selection of “the right river and the right location at the right time” was a purposeful process explored and documented through my writing. This focusing image was forefront as I wrote to learn. The vividness of the image of stepping into the river reminded me more succinctly than words of the importance of where, what, when, and how I collected my data. Such is the power of metaphors. First, they can succinctly capture what is often difficult or cumbersome to express in literal uses of language. Second, they stay with you. The simplicity and vividness of an image is readily present to inform and shape thinking and understanding. Writing-to-learn allows you the freedom to safely explore different metaphors to find what works to frame, rehearse, make sense of, and challenge your experience.

Au: Date?

Writing-To-Learn 25

The following sections provide an explication of writing-to-learn across the previously writing-to-learn categories as part of my research site selection.

WRITING AS RECORDING The “writing as recording” category is similar to conducting a paper audit trail of your research. When I do it, I write to order my experience. I establish the routine of writing about my research and begin by literally recording what I know. In deciding which classroom to select for research I record the details I know of the school, classroom teacher, and size and make-up of the class I am considering. For example, for the class I selected, I note that Ms. Charlotte (a pseudonym as are all the names of people and places used in my research) teaches at two schools and across grades in a pull-out English language learners (ELL) classroom situation. I document what I know about class size, student backgrounds (cultural, linguistic, and time spent learning English). I write down when and how I come to know this teacher. I keep a record of what I notice during the times I spent observing her classroom. As I record what I know of the teacher and class, I record my thoughts in lists and graphic organizers. When I observe, I write in a journal. Writing by hand allows me flexibility to make lists, sketch interactions, and make connections back and forth. Later, during the data collection phase, writing as recording also includes transcribing classroom talk (see Figure 3.1) and this writing further facilitates a closeness to the research, a familiarity nurtured through writing-to-learn. The act of writing makes these observations permanent. Writing makes tacit knowledge explicit and the permanence of these new records allows me to easily review what I know and commence the “forward search” to new knowledge.

WRITING AS ORGANIZING I organize what I know about the teacher and class. I think on paper continuing my “forward search.” This writing is for me. I can safely explore different possibilities. I review and chunk information as I evaluate what I know. I am aware that I will gather one set of data for my dissertation, so I consider carefully “stepping into the river at this location at this place and time.” I note the teacher’s schedule, her curriculum, and her selfdescribed teaching approach. I start writing connections across what I have observed about her teaching, her self-described pedagogy, and her curriculum. I organize the information I know about this classroom in

26 M. BOYD

1. Writing as recording Field notes of class sessions Profile of school, classroom, teacher Transcriptions of classroom discourse Transcriptions of teacher interviews 2. Writing as organizing Frameworks for examining talk Writing my own coding protocols Categorizing texts Connections across data points 3. Writing as reflecting on Class observations Interviews with teacher Articles Journaling 4. Writing as dialoguing With insistent other Examining choices and decisions Figure 3.1. Categories for writing-to-learn during data collection.

terms of my research parameters under categories such as “Why I want to observe this classroom.” Why this teacher Won award from peers She uses literature to guide her instruction (she has a ton of resources in her classroom and a small library at her home and is very knowledgeable both about literature and how it fits in with the 4th and 5th grade curriculum). She teaches through instructional units. She explicitly and frequently invites the students to make connections with their experience, culture.

Writing-To-Learn 27 Why this teacher Why the 4/5th grade class Students all have been speaking English for at least a year. Varied nationalities and literacy backgrounds (Pakistan, China, Mexico, Taiwan; some parents are literate in first language, some are not; some parents are graduate students, some work in restaurants). The students talk a lot (In English, appear very comfortable—lots of overlapping speech). Small size of the class. Most activities are done by the class as a whole. Defined beginning and end to class time (pull-out class).

Au: Numbers under 10 are spelled out in APA.

My writing as organizing articulates and explores the possibilities resulting from selecting this research site. This listing focuses on deciding whether there is a good match between this classroom and what I want to observe. I had already determined two important criteria for the selection of my research site. I needed an English Language Learning classroom that used a literature-based curriculum where I knew students were talking a lot. Having my thoughts in writing facilitates my critical evaluation and I am able to restructure relationships and ideas. The focusing image of the river articulates my sense of caution in the selection process. I get one go at this data collection process. My readings and experience remind me that teachers talk more than they think they do in many classrooms so I should observe and verify the classroom experience. My observations affirm that these fourth and fifth grade students are capable and willing speakers of English and that there is plenty of opportunity to talk in class. It is likely then that I can meet my goal to examine conditions or patterns in the classroom associated with this student talk. I also note that the class size and structure will allow me to successfully audio and videotape the Au: Videotape is classroom talk. As I understand and recast relationships, there is opportu- one word in nity for greater strategic complexity and understanding. Webster’s.

WRITING AS REFLECTING I reflect and make sense of my choice. I write every day. Sometimes I start by separating my writing into what I have observed such as time spent in class on a read aloud of a book or types of questions being asked, and then I reflect on what I know. I know I am interested in examining classroom talk, especially talk that is stimulated by children’s literature. In my writing as reflecting I think about questions I might ask if this classroom were the site for my data collection. I try to make sense of what I see, to play with

28 M. BOYD

contexts. I rehearse and explore protocols as a “backward search” to make broader sense of my observations. I hold myself accountable and I play with different types of writing in the process of researching. My river metaphor endures. Having decided on my classroom site, I take care selecting when and for how long I will step into the river to gather my data. As a former classroom teacher, I recognize the cycle of activity and accompanying talk that occurs throughout an instructional unit. I determine that my data bank will be an intact unit. For four months I observe the class and have lunch with Ms. Charlotte once a week. Finally I determine that the next instructional unit will be my data collection. My “right location and right time” is a 6 week instructional unit on whales in Ms. Charlotte’s fourth and fifth grade ELL classroom.

WRITING AS DIALOGUING WITH AN INSISTENT OTHER Writing as “dialoguing with an insistent other” provides opportunities to recast, question, and challenge my understandings. Most of this writing occurred via e-mail with my advisor, Don Rubin, who coined the phrase “dialoguing with an insistent other.” As I reread our e-mails during data collection in preparation for this chapter, I am struck by the number of questions Don asked and the time taken to communicate. It was not unusual to have several exchanges on the same topic extending over a few weeks. Often, I wrote a response, and Don asked questions, directing me to further fine tune a detail or support an assertion. For example: In the case of your planned study, how are the particular data you collect affected by the particular questions you are asking? You might address this in terms of both the classroom contexts /episodes you choose to sample/ record/transcribe and in terms of those you decide are not so relevant.

Always there were follow up questions in response to what I wrote, pushing me to both articulate what I understood and become aware of what needed my attention. Having these exchanges in writing facilitated a “backward search” to reflect, revise, and rehearse my thinking as I tested alternate and changing relationships among ideas. One particular question challenged me to re-conceptualize my thinking about my research assumptions. This question resulted in a series of writings-to-learn that stretched and challenged me to articulate my intuitions and expressive understandings. Don challenged me to articulate

Writing-To-Learn 29

how his conceptualization of learning and talking while building a chair differed from literature based education. Our writings as dialoguing were dubbed “the poem of the chair” in the e-mail headings.

THE POEM OF THE CHAIR Don’s initial question was deceptively simple, “So how does reading a book/reader response differ from crafting a chair?” When I responded with comments about fun, using imagination, the shared experience, and stimulating engaged student talk, he followed it up with, “What does literature inspire that is so different to working with a carpenter to create a chair?” My writing as dialoguing with an insistent other responses to this question pushed me to reach deeper into my knowledge and creativity and read more widely so I could be satisfied with my answer. The act of expressing my thoughts in writing sharpened my awareness of my assumptions and expectations. This writing challenged me to get beyond “the received ideology that literature is the ideal teaching mode.” This writing challenged me instead to seek to show in concrete and specific terms how literature could be a stimulus for literate student talk and connections across student learning through “a carefully theoretic analysis of language learning and the quality of dialogue” (quotes from personal email comunication with Don Rubin) Writing-to-learn through dialoguing can promote an intellectual collaborative intimacy and commitment. Writing as dialoguing with an insistent other to safely explore, discover, challenge, and struggle with ideas is one unique way language is a tool to construct meaning and reach understanding. Interestingly, I e-mailed Don to tell him I was going to write a chapter about my dissertation writing experience and without prompting his response was this: I always felt the toughest challenge I ever imposed on you was the task of explaining why literature-based instruction would be better than carpentry (building a chair together, I think was the specific scenario) for improving ELLs’ oral communication skills. (D. Rubin, personal communication).

Our dialogue allowed me to articulate what I thought about literature based instruction. This prompt in turn, allowed me to not only understand what I knew but also to convey that understanding to others in a poem as I moved from expressive to transactional writing culminating in the form of a published piece (see Figure 3.2).

Au: Date?

30 M. BOYD

(Com)Posing, pressing, Questioning my assumptions Demanding explication beyond the comfortable chair.

Who dubbed it a chair? Who selected the materials and then crafted it so? Who rests upon its cushions? And who decides? If I rest can I still (under)stand?

Let the seat of my learning be shaped by my tension As I struggle to articulate, And wake from sleep with response. Dare I re-question and write to stand? Figure 3.2. The Poem of the Chair.

CONCLUSION Writing-to-learn is about creating different texts that explore and express your relationship with your ideas, knowledge, and research. It allows you to see your thoughts, rehearse and revise what you think about them, and evaluate and restructure your thinking. These writings are part of your research data and will help you get to that polished, published manuscript because writing-to-learn will help you “step into the right river at the right location at the right time.” In the case of this chapter, writing the “The Poem of the Chair” helped me think about what I was trying to do. Writing to learn is about building the chair, or in this case, preparing for that published piece of writing.

Writing-To-Learn 31

REFERENCES Bangert-Drowns, R., Hurley, M., & Wilkinson, B. (2004). The effects of school based writing to learn interventions on academic achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 1−18. Boyd, M., & Rubin, D. (2002). Elaborated student talk in an elementary ESOL classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 36, 495−530. Boyd, M., & Rubin, D. (2006). How contingent questioning promotes extended student talk: The function of display questions. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(2), 141−169. Britton, J. (1972). Writing to learn and learning to write. The humanity of English. Urbana, IL: NCTE. Cresswell, J. (2003). Research design; Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Goodwin, C., & Duranti, A. (1992). Rethinking context: An introduction. In A. Duranti & Goodwin, C. (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 1−42). New York: CUP. Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28(2) 122−128. Frey, N., & Fisher, D. (2007). Reading for information in elementary school: Content literacy strategies to build comprehension. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Fulwiler, T., & Young, A. (1982). Introduction. In T. Fulwiler & A. Young (Eds.), Language connections: Writing and reading across the curriculum (pp. ix−xiii). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Gammill, D. (2006). Learning the write way. The Reading Teacher, 59(8), 754−762. Klein, P. (1999). Reopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11(3), 203−270. Knipper, K., & Diggan, T. (2006). Writing to learn across the curriculum: Tools for comprehension in content area classes. The Reading Teacher, 59(5), 462−470. Langer, J., & Applebee, A. (1987). How writing shapes thinking: A study of teaching and learning (NCTE Research Report No. 22). Urbana, IL: NCTE. Au: In APA, Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park: SAGE. personal Ortony, A., & Fainsilber, L. (1987). The role of metaphors in descriptions of emocommunications tions. TINLAP-3 160-163. Retrieved January 5, 2007, from are not cited in citeseer.ist.psu.edu/ortony87role.html refs. Rubin, D. (2000; 2006). Personal e-mail communication.