The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of teacher training in the NWP model on student writing. The sample consisted of 383 students, in junior and senior high school at the time of the study, with ten essays each gathered over three years. Teachers responded to a questionnaire of practices in teaching composition. Results favored the treatment group at the junior high level. The highest mean score was achieved by senior high students of trained teachers. Statistically significant differences were found between trained and nontrained teachers for four instructional practices and for the amount of interaction with other professionals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Applebee, A.
(1982). Writing in the secondary school: English and the content areas. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
2.
Barton, T. L.
, & Zehm, S. J. (1983). Beyond the Bay Area: A description of the Washington State University Writing Project. English Education, 15, 36-44.
3.
Bay Area Writing Project Evaluation Staff
. (1983). The National Writing Project evaluation portfolio. Berkeley, CA: National Writing Project.
4.
Cook, T. D.
, & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimental design and analysis issues for field setting. Chicago: Rand McNally.
5.
Dick, P. L.
(1979). How I spent part of my summer vacation becoming a “born-again” writer. Missouri Schools (Jefferson City, MO: Department of Elementary and Secondary Education), 45(2), 24-25.
6.
Freedman, S.
(1985). The National Writing Project survey of excellence in teaching writing: A summary of results. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Berkeley, School of Education.
7.
Hausen, N.
(1982). An investigation of the impact of the Wisconsin Writing Project on student composition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 214203)
8.
Hawkins, M. L.
, & Marshall, J. C. (1981). Evaluating writing grades 3-12. Ferguson, MO: Ferguson-Florissant School District.
9.
Hilgers, T. L.
(1982). Experimental control and the writing stimulus: The problem of unequal familiarity with content. Research in the teaching of English, 16, 381-390.
10.
Hillocks, G.
(1984, November). What works in teaching composition: A meta-analysis of experimental treatment studies. American Journal of Education, pp. 133-170.
11.
Lawrence, G.
(1977). Patterns of effective inservice education. Syracuse: National Council of States on In-Service Education.
12.
Lehr, F.
(1982). ERIC/RCS report: Promoting schoolwide writing. English Education, 14, 47-52.
13.
Marshall, J.
(1983, April). Student achievement in the holistic teaching of writing: Project impact and diffusion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
14.
Marshall J.
, & Hales, L. (1972). Classroom test construction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
Mason, M.
(1981). A vacation that sustained me three years. English Journal, 70, 43-44.
16.
Myers, M. A.
(1980). A procedure for writing assessment and holistic scoring. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
17.
Olson, M. D.
, & DiStefano, P. (1980). Describing and testing the effectiveness of a contemporary model for in-service education in teaching composition. English Education, 12, 69-76.
18.
Penfield, E.
(1979). Faculty development and the teaching of writing: A local adaptation of the National Writing Project. Baton Rouge: Louisiana Writing Project. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 200960)
19.
Shook, J.
(1981). The Gateway Writing Project: An evaluation of teachers teaching teachers to write. Research in the Teaching of English, 15, 282-284.
20.
Stahlecker, J. S.
(1979). Long-term follow-up report on four NWP Programs: Evaluation of the National Writing Project. Berkeley: University of California, School of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 191062)
21.
Thomas, S.
, & Keech, C. (1979). Field studies report: Evaluation of the National Writing Project. Berkeley: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 191060)
22.
Virginia Writing Project
. (1985). Evaluation 1978-84: Executive summary. Richmond: Capital Writing Project of Virginia Commonwealth University.
23.
Zemelman, S.
, & Wagner, B. J. (1982). Application for validation. Elmhurst, IL: Chicago Area Writing Project.
