Writing Theories & Pedagogies: Looking Back to Move Forward

Writing instruction today still feels daunting despite the development and application of various theories in recent years because, according to Hayes’ (2012), writing is “a very complex skill involving the execution and coordination of attention, motor, visual, executive functioning, memory, and language as well as writing knowledge, processes and skills” (Graham, 2019, p.10). Imagine writing as an orchestra, each of the requisites one of the many instruments that come together in harmony to produce something unified and beautiful. Factor in the individuals, with all their unique differences, that spend countless years perfecting their craft. Now imagine writing instructors as the conductors of that orchestra, but with little guidance on how to lead this composition.

As I mention in An Inside Look: One Approach to Teaching Writing, much of the coursework in undergraduate education classes emphasizes educational theory (ie how a child learns and best education practices in general), reading instruction and an evaluation of literature for the various age groups. Although there were semester long offerings that emphasized reading instruction, writing instruction was a mere mention within those courses or in general education coursework. However, like Graham & Harris (2019) state in the opening of Evidence Based Practices in Writing, “The general lack of attention to improving writing instruction nationwide during this and the last several decades should not distract from the phenomenal job that many schools and teachers do when teaching writing” (p.3).

The progress that writing instruction has experienced, and I do believe there has been significant progress, is due in large part to the shift in mindset regarding the importance of writing to overall learning, with significant impacts on other disciplines. Consider the impact of teaching sentence construction, for example, in increasing reading fluency (Graham & Harris, 2019, p.7). What was once writing as pure dictation for handwriting or grammatical structure in the form of editing prescribed sentences evolved into an understanding that writing, and therefore writing instruction, is a much more robust task.

The task is now redefined as a process where every stage, from the development of a motivating and supportive environment to the writing processes of planning, drafting, revising, and celebrating is equally valued. We recognize “writing as a tool for learning other content” and that writing extends beyond what is done in the confines of our classrooms (Hodges, 2017, p, 141). One view of writing instruction that I found to be particularly valuable was that of the sociocultural theory of writing. In this theory, teachers are co-authors on students’ writing playing an active role in instructing students, offering support, providing feedback and modeling writing practices (Hodges 2017). I think the best practices we find in many of our own classrooms and within the pages of my current research, all align with this theory. Why else would we work to create a sense of writing community within our classes rich in modeling, process-driven writing instruction? When we create opportunities for peer collaboration, confer with our writers and set goals, provide writing for different purposes and audiences we are creating instruction where “writing becomes a process driven by teamwork and support” (Hodges, 2017, p. 142).

Let us take a brief look at some of the most prevalent writing theories. One of the first writing instruction theories was the cognitive process theory writing. As its name suggests, this theory emphases writing “complex system of inter-working cognitive processes” (Hodges, 2017, p. 139). The cognitive process writing theory acknowledges that writers move through the major steps in the writing process in a cyclical nature, consistently revisiting different steps in the process while writing. Proponents of the cognitive process theory of writing recognize the importance of writing across disciplines, writing for different purposes and audiences, and using planning tools like graphic organizers. Because the work of translating ideas into text requires various cognitive functions, educators should ensure attention is paid to leading writers to a level of automaticity with the mechanical writing tasks. In theory, this will free up room with the executive, cognitive functioning for the more complex tasks of idea generations and meaning making.

Where the cognitive process theory focuses primarily on the mental process of writing, the sociocultural theory shifts the focus to motivation and social influences. Writing is seen as a collaborative, social activity through which writers can learn from peers, teachers and authors. It shares a similarity in position to the cognitive process theory in that writing is still viewed as a tool for learning. Where it differs is the sociocultural theory extends our understanding of writing and writing instruction beyond the confines of a classroom. Writers bring with them to each writing task prior knowledge, understanding of language, genres, motivation and technology influences. Sociocultural theory “prioritizes the interactions between participants rather than the products” (Hodges, 2017, p. 141). Most of our classrooms today embody, at least partially, the sociocultural theory of writing. We are incorporating collaborations on writing through conferring and peer revision practices, for example. They, our classrooms, are also built upon the principle that when “students have effective models of writing and writing instruction, they become more efficacious writers” (Hodges, 2017, p.143). We incorporate practices like modeling writing practices, providing choice in prompts and activities. In so doing, we are following the principles of social-cognitive theory and self-efficacy. The Ecological theory also acknowledges the social and cultural factors that influence students in that it acknowledges the writer is most influenced by proximal processes, or the social relationships they engage in daily. Further, it states that these influences will inevitably become part of the writing experience.

I do not believe writing, or writing instruction, is in the same position it was a decade ago. Nor do I believe we are where we need to be. Like Tow Mater says in Disney’s Cars (2016) “There ain’t no need to watch where I’m going. Just need to know where I’ve been.” Writing instruction has much to learn from the past- perhaps a return to more formal handwriting and grammar instruction. However, we must also keep moving forward to address the needs of our learners and society now. I agree with Graham & Harris that “what students learn about writing will be influenced by their teacher’s experience teaching writing, knowledge about how to teach it, attitudes about writing, and confidence as a writer and writing teacher” (p. 10). We must continue to make progress by taking full advantage of new research, technology, and each other.

---

References

Graham, Steve & Harris, Karen R. (2019). Evidence-based practices in writing. In S. Graham, C.A. MacArthur & M. Hebert (3rd Ed.). Best practices in writing instruction (p. 3- 28). New York, NYL Guildford

Hodges, Tracey S. (2017). Theoretically speaking: An examination of four theories and how they support writing in the classroom. The Clearing house: A Journal of Educational Strategies 90(4). 139-146.