We explore three primary paradigms that continue to dominate writing instruction in secondary schools. By illustrating these paradigms, exploring their underlying assumptions with two classes of preservice teachers (PSTs) enrolled in a required course on teaching writing and identifying theoretical and pedagogical alternatives, we examine how models of teacher preparation can invite teacher educators and PSTs to “wobble” with and, consequently critique, their deeply held beliefs about writing instruction. We analyze data collected in two major course projects completed at the beginning and end of the course to demonstrate how supporting PSTs in critiquing and exploring alternative approaches to teaching writing can enable them to challenge the “methods du jour” that emerge as a result of problematic models of school assessment and policy. Ultimately, this study illustrates promising interventions for helping PSTs do more than simply teach writing in formulaic ways at the expense of addressing students’ needs in their specific teaching contexts.
ApplebeeA. N.LangerJ. A. (2011). A snapshot of writing instruction in middle and high schools. English Journal, 100, 14–27.
2.
ApplebeeA. N.LangerJ. A. (2013). Writing instruction that works: Proven methods for middle and high school classrooms. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
3.
BraddockR.Lloyd-JonesR.SchoerL. (1963). Research in written composition. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
4.
BrannonL.CourtneyJ. P.UrbanskiC. P.WoodwardS. V.ReynoldsJ. M.IannoneA. E.…KendrickM. (2008). The five-paragraph essay and the deficit model of education. English Journal, 98, 16–21.
5.
BrownD. W. (2009). Coming to terms with what it means to teach and learn grammar. American Speech, 84, 216–227.
6.
CampbellK. H.LatimerK. (2012). Beyond the five-paragraph essay. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
7.
CharmazK. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, England: Sage.
8.
ChristensenL. (2009). Teaching for joy and justice: Re-imagining the language arts classroom. Portland, OR: Rethinking Schools.
9.
Conference on English Education Executive Committee. (2005). What do we know and believe about the roles of methods courses and field experiences in English education?Retrieved fromhttp://www.ncte.org/cee/positions/roleofmethodsinee
10.
DysonA. H.GenishiC. (2005). On the case: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
11.
EmersonR. M.FretzR. I.ShawL. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12.
FechoB. (2011). Teaching for the students: Habits of heart, mind, and practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
13.
FleischerC.Andrew-VaughnS. (2009). Writing outside your comfort zone: Helping students navigate unfamiliar genres. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
14.
FuD. (2009). Writing between languages. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
15.
GarciaA.O’Donnell-AllenC. (2014). Wobbling in public: Supporting new and experienced teachers. English Journal, 103, 65–70.
16.
GarciaA.O’Donnell-AllenC. (2015). Pose, wobble, flow: A culturally proactive approach to literacy instruction. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
17.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1965). Awareness of dying. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
18.
GoetzJ. P.LeCompteM. D. (1981). Ethnographic research and the problem of data reduction. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 12, 51–70.
19.
GonzalesN.MollL. C.AmantiC. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. New York, NY: Routledge.
20.
GrahamS.PerinD. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445–476.
21.
HancockS. (2011). White women’s work: On the front lines in urban education. In LandsmanJ. G.LewisC. W. (Eds.), White teachers/diverse classrooms: Creating inclusive schools, building on students’ diversity, and providing true educational equity (pp. 91–109). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
22.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
23.
HillocksG.Jr (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
24.
ItoM.GutiérrezK.LivingstoneS.PenuelB.RhodesJ.SalenK.…WatkinsS. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
25.
KajderS. (2010). Adolescents and digital literacies. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
26.
KistW.PytashK. E. (2015). “I love to flip the pages”: Preservice teachers and New Literacies within a field experience. English Education, 47, 131–167.
27.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
LeCompteM. D.GoetzJ. P. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 31–60.
30.
LortieD. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
McCarthyS. J.MkhizeD. (2013). Teachers’ orientations towards writing. Journal of Writing Research, 5, 1–33.
32.
MorganD. N.PytashK. E. (2014). Preparing preservice teachers to become teachers of writing: A 20-year review of the research literature. English Education, 47, 6–37.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core state standards. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School.
36.
National Writing Project & Nagin, C. (2006). Because writing matters: Improving student writing in our schools. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37.
NewellG.VanDerHeideJ.OlsenA. W. (2014). High school English teachers’ argumentative epistemologies for teaching writing. English Education, 49, 95–119.
Ortmeier-HooperC. (2013). The ELL writer: Moving beyond basics in the secondary classroom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
40.
ParisD.AlimH. S. (2014). What are we seeking to sustain through culturally sustaining pedagogy?: A loving critique forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84, 85–100.
41.
RansdellD. R.GlauG. R. (1996). Articulation and student voices: Eliminating the perception that “High school English doesn’t teach you nothing.”English Journal, 85, 17–21.
42.
SaldañaJ. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London, England: Sage.
43.
SipeR. B.RosewarneT. (2006). Purposeful writing: Genre study in the secondary writing workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
44.
SmagorinskyP.JohannessenL.KahnE.McCannT. (2010). The dynamics of writing instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
45.
SmithM. A.SwainS. (2011). Wise eyes: Prompting for meaningful student writing. Berkeley, CA: National Writing Project.
46.
SmithermanG.VillanuevaV. (Eds.). (2003). Language diversity in the classroom: From intention to practice. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
47.
StopperR. (1996). In defense of the five-paragraph essay [Letter to the editor]. English Journal, 85, 9.
UrbanskiC. (2005). Using the workshop approach in the high school English classroom: Modeling effective writing, reading, and thinking strategies for student success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
52.
WesleyK. (2000). The ill effects of the five paragraph theme. English Journal, 90, 57–60.
53.
WheelerR.SwordsR. (2006). Code-switching: Teaching Standard English in urban classrooms. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
54.
WilleyR. J.BerneJ. (1996). Process of discovery: A writer’s workshop. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
