Using a single-subjects-with-replicates design, this study investigated conference influence on first graders' knowledge about revision as well as revision activity. Sixteen children participated in group writing conferences with a teacher, in a natural classroom setting, every other week from February through June. Data from three baseline points and seven conference points were summarized. At conference data collection points, students wrote, conferred in groups with a teacher, were interviewed about potential revisions, and revised work in progress. At baseline points, the same events occurred, but there were no conferences. Two main variables were used to evaluate knowledge of the revision process: number of spots suggested for revision and average specificity of suggested changes. The main variable for actual revision activity was total number of revisions made. Final drafts were also rated for quality. Conferences did influence revision knowledge and revision activity for many children. However, the extent of conference influence was mediated by certain entry level student characteristics. Generally, the most positive effects occurred for students who began with the least amount of knowledge about revision, who were initially doing the least amount of revision, and who were initially writing pieces judged among the lowest in quality.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Applebee, A. N.
(1981). Writing in the secondary school: English and the content areas. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
2.
Barnes, D.
, & Todd, F. (1977). Communication and learning in small groups. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
3.
Beach, R.
(1979, May). The effect of between-draft teacher evaluation versus student self-evaluation on high school students' revising of rough drafts. Research in the Teaching of English, 13 (2), 111-119.
4.
Beach, R.
(1984, April). The effects of reading ability on seventh graders' narrative writing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans.
5.
Bracewell, R. J.
, Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1978). The development of audience awareness in writing. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 154 433)
6.
Bridwell, L. S.
(1980). Revising strategies in twelfth grade students' transactional writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 197-222.
7.
Campbell, D. T.
, & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
8.
Chatman, S.
(1975). Toward a theory of narrative. New Literary History, 6 (2), 295-318.
9.
Crowhurst, M.
(1986, Fall). Revision strategies of students at three grade levels. English Quarterly, 19 (3), 216-226.
10.
CTB/McGraw Hill
. (1985). California Achievement Test. Monterey, CA: Author.
11.
Daiute, C. A.
(1985). Do writers talk to themselves? In S. W. Freedman (Ed.), The acquisition of written language: Revision and response (pp. 133-139). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
12.
Daiute, C. A.
(1986, May). Physical and cognitive factors in revising: Insights from studies with computers. Research in the Teaching of English, 20 (2), 141-159.
13.
Diederich, P. B.
(1974). Measuring growth in English. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
14.
DiPardo, A.
, & Freedman, S. W. (1987). Historical overview: Groups in the writing classroom (Tech. Rep. No. 4). Berkeley: University of California; Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.
15.
Faigley, L.
, & Witte, S. P. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400-414.
16.
Faigley, L.
, & Witte, S. P. (1984). Measuring the effects of revisions on text structure. In R. Beach & L. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition research (pp. 95-108). New York: Guilford Press.
17.
Fitzgerald, J.
(1987). Revision in writing. Review of Educational Research, 57, 481-506.
18.
Fitzgerald, J.
, & Markham, L. (1987). Teaching children about revision in writing. Cognition and Instruction, 4 (1), 3-24.
19.
Flower, L.
, & Hayes, J. A. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365-387.
20.
Flower, L.
, Hayes, J. R., Carey, L., Shriver, K., & Stratman, J. (1986). Detection, diagnosis, and the strategies of revision. College Composition and Communication, 37 (1), 16-55.
21.
Freedman, S.
(1984, April). The evaluation of, and response to student writing: A review. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
22.
Freedman, S. W.
, & Calfee, R. (1984). Understanding and comprehending. Written Communication, 1, 459-490.
23.
Gere, A. R.
, & Stevens, R. S. (1985). The language of writing groups: How oral response shapes revision. In S. W. Freedman (Ed.), The acquisition of written language: Response and revision (pp. 85-105). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
24.
Graham, S.
, & MacArthur, C. (In press). Improving learning disabled students' skills at revising essays produced on a word processor: Self-instructional strategy training. Journal of Special Education.
25.
Graves, D. H.
(1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Exeter, NH: Heinemann.
26.
Graves, D. H.
, & Murray, D. M. (1980). Revision: In the writer's workshop and in the classroom. Journal of Education, 162, 38-56.
27.
Jacobs, S. E.
, & Karliner, A. B. (1977). Helping writers to think: The effect of speech roles in individual conferences on the quality of thought in student writing. College English, 38 (5), 489-505.
28.
MacArthur, C. A.
, & Graham, S. (1987). Learning disabled students' composing under three methods of text production: Handwriting, word processing, and dictation. Journal of Special Education, 21 (3), 22-42.
29.
Murray, D.
(1978). Internal revision: A process of discovery. In C. Cooper and L. Odell (Eds.), Research on composing: Points of departure (pp. 85-103). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
30.
National Assessment of Educational Progress & Educational Testing Service
. (1986). The writing report card: Writing achievement in American schools. Princeton, NJ: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
31.
Nystrand, M.
(1986). The structure of written communication: Studies in reciprocity between writers and readers. Orlando: Academic Press.
32.
Odell, L.
(1980). Business writing: Observations and implications for teaching composition. Theory into Practice, 19 (3), 225-232.
33.
Pianko, S. (1977). The composing acts of college freshman writers: A description. Dissertation Abstracts International, 38 (7), 3983A.
34.
Scardamalia, M.
, & Bereiter, C. (1983). The development of evaluative, diagnostic, and remedial capabilities in children's composing. In M. Martlew (Ed.), The psychology of written language: A developmental approach (pp. 67-95). London: Wiley.
35.
Scardamalia, M.
, & Bereiter, C. (1986). Research on written composition. In C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 778-803). New York: Macmillan.
36.
Shaw, R. A.
, Pettigrew, J., & van Nostrand, A. D. (1983). Tactical planning of writing instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 84, 45-51.
37.
Sommers, N.
(1980). Revision strategies of student writers and experienced adult writers. College Composition and Communication, 31, 378-388.
38.
Stallard, C. K.
(1974). An analysis of the behavior of good student writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 8, 206-218.
39.
Tawney, J. W.
, & Gast, D. L. (1984). Single subject research in special education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
40.
Vukelich, C.
(1986). The relationship between peer sharing and seven-year-olds' text revisions. In J. A. Niles & R. W. Lalik (Eds.), Solving problems in literacy: Learners, teachers and researchers. Thirty-fifth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 300-305). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
41.
Vukelich, C.
, & Leverson, L. D. (1987). Two young writers: The relationship between text revisions and teacher/student conferences. Research in Literacy: Merging perspectives. Thirty-sixth Yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 281-286). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
42.
Walker, C. P.
, & Elias, D. (1987, October). Writing conference talk: Factors associated with high-and low-rated writing conferences. Research in the Teaching of English, 21 (3), 266-285.
43.
Whaley, J.F.
(1981). Readers' expectations for story structure. Reading Research Quarterly, 17 (1), 90-114.
44.
Witte, S. P.
(1987). Pre-text and Composing. College Composition and Communication, 38 (4), 397-425.
