1. Scaffolding the Writing Process to Assist ELLs Navigating through It Steven Bookman 1

2. Purpose of the Grant The purpose of this grant is to pilot study whether English Language Learners write better essays and pass the exit examinations easier if they followed a procedural or carefully-scaffolded method to writing. 2

3. Linear vs. Recursive Writing Methods Linear A product-oriented approach treats writing as a procedure (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2009; Reid, 1984). Writing is viewed as a mathematical formula (Reid, 1982). Recursive A process-oriented approach treats writing with no plan of action (Ferris & Hedgcock, 2009; Masuda, 2003; Zamel, 1983, 1984). There are hierarchical processes that are not fixed in a rigid order (Flower & Hayes, 1981). 3

4. Rationale for a Carefully- Scaffolded Method to Writing Students are able to envision the whole essay before they write it in paragraph form. The brainstorming process is more complete and focused. The focus is on the outline. 4

5. Theoretical Framework for a Linear Method to Writing (1) Four-component instructional design model (Van Merriënboer, 1997; Van Merriënboer & Kirschner, 2013) –Model where each component of a real-world task is worked on individually until it becomes proficient while the tasks are completed in its entirety Metacognition (Flavell, 1976, 1979) –The awareness and control of one’s own knowledge 5

6. Theoretical Framework for a Procedural Method to Writing (2) Socratic method –“…way of teaching in which the master professes to impart no information…but draws forth more and more definite answers by means of pointed questions” (Runes, 2001, pp. 522-523) 6

7. Using the Socratic Method in my Teaching Method (1) Brainstorming is treated as a dialogue in one’s head via question and answer. –The Socratic method helps students consider other view points (Jackson, 2007). –Students talk out ideas in their heads (Jackson, 2007). 7

8. Using the Socratic Method in my Teaching Method (2) The Socratic method teaches cognitive skill development (Jackson, 2007). –The act of questioning and answering helps generate more supporting reasons and details. –Students sort out and synthesize ideas easier (Jackson, 2007). –The questions serve as subheadings and supporting reasons. 8

9. Learning Outcomes for Grant Students will create a formal outline. –Outlining is a summative skill. –Outlining is a skill required for other classes (e.g., Communication [COMM] and Reading [RDL] classes). Students will write thesis-based essays. 9

10. Procedures for the Grant Students were introduced to each step of the writing process individually while writing whole essays from the beginning of the semester. Each step was thoroughly explained then practiced until it was performed proficiently and effectively before moving to the next step. 10

11. How Does a Linear Method to Writing Look? There are three phases to a linear method to writing. https://bcc- cuny.digication.com/the_theory_and_practice_f or_improving_writing_skills_an_alternative_per spective/coursework –Brainstorming Phase –Outlining Phase –Proofreading Phase 11

12. Brainstorming Phase 12

13. Outlining Phase 13

14. Proofreading Phase 14

15. Assessment In-class work Homework Midterm exam Final exam One-to-one individual conferences Group project 15

16. Quantitative Results of Grant (1) Likert scale result –The students felt more confident about their writing. –Although the students felt that they were too many steps in the beginning, they would not change anything about it after they completed the method taught to them during the semester. 16

17. Quantitative Results of Grant (2) Midterm and final exams –Eight out of 13, or 62%, passed midterm and/or final exams. –Out of the five students who did not pass the midterm and/or final, two of them did not take the final exam. –The three who did not pass the midterm and final exams did not follow the method taught to them during the semester. 17

18. Qualitative Results of Grant The students felt they were more focused and organized in the writing, especially in their brainstorming. The students were able to come up with more ideas in their brainstorming process. The students were able to monitor where they were in the writing process at all times. Students were able to monitor sentence junctions much easier. 18

19. Advantages to Using a Procedural Method to Writing (1) Students are more focused. Students know exactly where they are in the writing process at all times. Students are able to envision the essay before it is written in paragraph form. Students are able to brainstorm more ideas and develop an outline much quicker. 19

20. Advantages to Using a Procedural Method to Writing (2) Students are able to monitor sentence junctions much easier. 20

21. Disadvantages to Using a Procedural Method to Writing Teaching students to create complete outlines takes a long time. Some students will resist wanting to generate a complete outline the first time it is introduced to them. Some students do not work well with outlines. 21

22. How Does My Research Fulfill the Grant The theme for the grant was to help students get through their remedial, especially Reading (RDL), classes faster. Since outlining is a skill that Reading (RDL) classes test on their final exams, students get extra practice and instruction. The Socratic method is one way of teaching analytical reading skills. 22

23. Skills beyond Remedial Classes Since a procedural method to writing follows the scientific method, ELLs are exposed to the type of thinking they will be using in their hard and soft science courses. Many professors in public speaking classes (COMM 12 and 20) require students to make outlines. 23

24. References (1) Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2009). Teaching ESL Composition: Purpose, process, and practice (2 nd ed.). New York: Routledge. Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. Resnick, The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. 24

25. References (2) Flavell, J. H. (1979, October). Metacognition and monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906-911. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981, December). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365-387. doi: 10.2307/356600 25

26. References (3) Jackson, J. D. (2007, Spring). Socrates and Langdell in legal writing: Is the Socratic method a proper tool for legal writing classes. California Western Law Review, 43(2), 267-308. Retrieved February 21, 2014, from heinonline.gov. 26

27. References (4) Masuda, P. K. (2003). Process and post- process: A discursive history. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 65-83. doi: 10.1016/s1060-3743(02)00127-3 Reid, J. (1984, September). The radical outliner and the radical brainstormer: A perspective on composing processes. TESOL Quarterly, 18(3), 529-534. doi: 10.2307/3586722 27

28. References (5) Reid, J. (1985, June). Comments on Joy Reid's "The Radical Outliner and the Radical Brainstormer: A Perspective on Composing Processes." The Author Responds. TESOL Quarterly, 19(2), 398- 400. doi: 10.2307/3586842 Runes, D. D. (2001). The dictionary of philosophy. Citadel Press: New York. 28

29. References (6) Van Merriënboer, Jeroen J. G. (1997). Training complete cognitive skills: A four- component instructional design model for technical training. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Van Merriënboer, Jeroen J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2013). Ten steps to complex learning: A systemic approach to four-component instructional design (2 nd ed.). New York: Routledge. 29

30. References (7) Zamel, V. (1983, June). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 165-187. doi: 10.2307/3586647 Zamel, V. (1984, March). Comments on Vivian Zamel’s “the composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies.” The author responds. TESOL Quarterly, 18(1), 154-158. doi: 10.2307/3586345 30

31. Contact Information Email: steven.bookman@bcc.cuny.edu or steven.bookman@yahoo.comsteven.bookman@bcc.cuny.edu steven.bookman@yahoo.com Eportfolio: https://bcc- cuny.digication.com/the_theory_and_practi ce_for_improving_writing_skills_an_altern ative_perspective/homehttps://bcc- cuny.digication.com/the_theory_and_practi ce_for_improving_writing_skills_an_altern ative_perspective/home 31