Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of English

Annotated Bibliography 237VORDERER, P., & BRYANT, J. (EDS.). (2006). Playing video games: Motives, responses, and consequences.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.WritingCRAGG, L., & NATION, K. (2006). Exploring written narrative in children with poor reading comprehension.Educational Psychology, 26(1), 55-72.Examines the spelling performance and the narrative writings of 10-year-old poorcomprehenders. Finds that poor comprehenders and control children did not differ in spellingability. Poor comprehenders produced narratives of similar length and syntactic complexity tocontrol children. However, poor comprehenders’ narratives captured less of the story contentand contained a less sophisticated story structure than those of control children.FISHMAN, J., LUNSFORD, A., & MCGREGOR, B. (2005). Performing writing, performing literacies.College Composition and Communication, 57(2), 224-252.Tracks 189 Stanford students’ writing for two years as part of a five-year Stanford Study ofWriting. Between the first and second years, changes in the kinds of student writing reflectedshifts towards a focus on more disciplinary-specific assignments, but their self-confidence aswriters declined during the first year but then rebounded by the end of the second year. Overthe two years, students generated extensive digital writing both outside and within classes, developinga strong interest in performing self-sponsored writing. Highlights two students’ performancesof texts that represent the increasing importance of performance of digital writingfor audiences outside the classroom.GALBRAITH, D., FORD, S., WALKER, G., & FORD, J. (2005). The contribution of different componentsof working memory to knowledge transformation during writing. L1 – Educational Studiesin Language and Literature, 5(2), 113-145.Examines how ideas are developed during outlining and how this is related to the quality of theresulting text. Finds that the beneficial effect of planning on text content depends on two factorsthat indicated knowledge transforming activities: (1) the extent to which new ideas areintroduced during the organizational phase of planning, and (2) the extent to which rhetoricalgoals are incorporated in planning. Relatively less experienced writers show much less of theseactivities during planning. Provides implications for education.GRAHAM, S., HARRIS, K. R., & MASON, L. (2005). Improving the writing performance, knowledge,and self-efficacy of struggling young writers: The effects of self-regulated strategy-development.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(2), 207-241.Examines whether Self-Regulated Strategy Development (SRSD) is effective for improving thewriting, knowledge of writing, and self-efficacy of struggling, 3rd-grade writers. The instructionfocuses on learning writing strategies and knowledge for planning and composing storiesand persuasive essays. Finds that SRSD had a positive impact on students’ writing performanceand knowledge about writing. Peer support was found to enhance transfer to uninstructedgenres.GRISHAM, D. L., & WOLSEY, T. D. (2005). Improving writing: Comparing the responses of eighthgraders,preservice teachers and experienced teachers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 21(4), 315-330.Examines how middle-school students and teachers in preservice and Master of Arts classesanalyzed and scored the same set of writings in small-group evaluations. Finds that studentsand teachers evaluated the writings similarly. Concludes that there is general agreement aboutwhat constitutes good writing, and that evaluation of writing may provide an instructionalentry for teachers.