Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The differences in the ability to write critical and analytical essays among students with individual annotation styles were investigated. Critical and analytical writing was determined by the writer's ability to respond to a text with logical and critical analysis and attention to its thematic argument. Annotation styles were determined by ways of annotating a text: critical inquiry as skillful and simple highlighting as verbatim. The results indicated that skillful annotators produced more critical and analytical writing samples than did verbatim annotators. Verbatim annotators recycled information rather than analyzing it. The findings are congruent with theories that promote explicit metacognitive skills and support the position that teaching tactics consonant with students' cultural backgrounds are more likely to succeed in fostering critical thinking reflected in writing.

Keywords

annotation double-entry journal efficacy expectation marginal commentary reading strategies teacher role cognition

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Applebee, A. N. (1984). Contexts for learning to write: Studies of secondary school instruction. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Brown, A. L. (1978). Knowing when, where, and how to remember: A problem of metacognition. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, 75, 811-820.

Dansereau, D. F. (1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein , E. T. Goetz ,& P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies(pp. 103-120). New York: Academic Press.

Diyanni, R. (2002). One hundred great essays. New York: Addison-Wesley.

Driver, R. , Aasoko, H. , Leach, J. , Mortimer, E. , & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Research, 23(7), 5-12.

Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication, 28, 122-122.

Fosnot, C. T. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Jackson, H. J. (2001). Marginalia: Readers writing in books. New Haven: Yale University Press.

10.

Jones, B. F. (1988). Text learning strategy instruction: Guidelines from theory and practice. In C. E. Weinstein , E. T. Goetz , & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies(pp. 223-260). New York: Academic Press.

11.

Lavelle E. , & Zuercher, N. (2001). The writing approaches of university students. Higher Education, 42, 373-391.

12.

Levin, J. R. (1982). Pictures as prose learning devices. In A. Flammer & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Discourse processing: Advances in psychology(pp. 412-444). New York: North-Holland.

13.

Marrow, J. H. , Defoer, H. L. M. , Korteweg, A. S. ,& Wustefelf, W. C. M. (1990). The golden age of Dutch manuscript painting. New York: George Braziller.

14.

Mayer, R. E. (1988). Learning strategies: An overview. In C. E. Weinstein , E. T. Goetz , & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies(pp. 11-22). New York: Academic Press.

15.

McCombs, B. , & Pope, J. E. (1994). Motivating hard to reach students. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

16.

McKeachie, W. J. (1988). The need for study strategy training. In C. E. Weinstein , E. T. Goetz , & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies(pp. 3-9). New York: Academic Press.

17.

Palmer, D. J. , & Goetz, E. T. (1988). Selection and use of study strategies: The role of the studier's belief about self and strategies. In C. E. Weinstein , E. T. Goetz ,& P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies(pp. 41-61). New York: Academic Press.

18.

Schmeck, R. R. (1988). Individual differences and learning strategies. In C. E. Weinstein , E. T. Goetz ,& P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Learning and study strategies(pp. 171-191). New York: Academic Press.

19.

Schunk, D. H. (1983). Ability versus effort attributional feedback: Different effects on selfefficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 848-856.

20.

von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Sensory experience, abstraction, and teaching. In L. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.). Constructivism in education(pp. 369-384). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Annotation As an Index to Critical Writing

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References