Download ED334582.pdf and more Study notes Credit and Risk Management in PDF only on Docsity!
DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 334 582
CS 212 948
AUTHOR Nelson, Jennie
TITLE "This Was an Easy Assignment":Examiniag How Students
Interpret Academic Writing Tasks.Technical Report
No. 43.
INSTITUTION Center for the Study of Writing, Berkeley, CA.;
Center for the Study of Writing, Pittsburgh, PA.
SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),
Washington, DC.
PUB DATE Oct 90
NOTE 34p.
PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143)
EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO Plus Postage.
DESCRIPTORS College Freshmen; *Content Area Writing; Higher
Education; *Student Attitudes; Teacher Expectations
of Students; *Writing Assignments; Writing
Research
IDENTIFIERS Writing Contexts; Writing Tasks
ABSTRACT
A study explored academic writing from the students'
side of the desk, examining how different
tasks and writing
situations influenced students' approaches. The study used interviews
and process logs to examine how 13
college freshmen interpreted
writing assignments in a variety of courses (sociology, engineering,
and literature) and how these
interpretations differed from their
instructors' intentions. Results indicated that: (1) students'
responses to assignments depended upon what they were actually
rewarded for producing; and (2) in some situations, students relied
on short cuts to produce papers and failed to engage in the kinds of
learning activities that assignments
were designed to promote.
Findings suggest that studentsdraw from a range of individual and
situational resources in their effortsto define and complete
assignments and that these factors
can interact in complex ways to
shape students' approaches. (Thirty-nine references and guidelines
for a paper for a sociology course are attached.) (RS)
**************************************X********************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
******.****************************************************************
Center
for
the
Study
of
Writing
TechnicalReportNo.
"THISWASANEASYASSIGNMENT":
EXAMININGHOWSTUDENTSINTERPRET
ACADEMICWRITINGTASKS
JennieNelson
October,
u.a. DEPARTMENTOf EDUCATION OnceofEducational
ResearchlineImptovemsra
EDUCATIONALRESOURCES
INFORMATION
CENTER(ERIC)
0Tfdocumentnes beenriDrOduCd SS receivedfromlh personorofganization
Originatingit
0Minorchanges havebeenmoduloimprOve
reproductionquality
PeNntOfWOW°,0pnion$1111110Chn thICICCu momdonotncesuniy
representomciai OERIpositionorpolicy
UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
CarnegieMellonUniversity
BESTCOPYAVAILABLE
CENTERFORTHESTUDYOFWRITING
Director
Co-Directors
AssociateDirector
Editor
PublicationReview
Chair
AssistantChairs
Advisors
SarahWarshauerFreedman,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
AnneHaasDyson,UniversityofCa0ornia,Berkeley
LindaFlower,CarnegieMellonUniversity
JamesGray,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
J.R.Hayes,CarnegieMellonUniversity
SandraR.Schecter,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
AndrewBauman,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
Board
JanisL.Patch,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
RebeccaE.Burnett,CarnegieMellonUniversity
AnneDiPardo,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
DavidL.Wallace,CarnegieMellonUniversity
CharlesFillmore,UniversityofCalifornia,Berkeley
JillH.Larkin,CarnegieMellonUniversity
MillieAlmy,UniversityofCalifornia,
Berkeley
CarlaAsher,HerbertH.LehmanCollegeof
theCityUniversityofNewYork
NancieAtwell,BoothbayRegionElementary
School,BoothbayHarbor,ME
RobertdeBeaugrande,UniversityofFlorida
CarolBerkenkotter,MichiganTechnological
University
RubyBernstein,NorthgateHighSchool,
WalnutCreek,CA
LoisBird,WhaleLanguageConsultant,Palo
Alto,CA
SheridanBlau,UniversityofCalifornia,
SantaBarbara
WayneBooth,UniversityofChicago
JamesBritton,UniversityofLopion
MichaelCole,UniversityofCalifornia,San
Diego
ColetteDaiute,HarvardUniversity
JohnDaly,UniversityofTexas,Austin
PeterElbow,UniversityofMassachusetts
JoAnneT.Eresh,WritingandSpeaking
Center,Pittsburgh,PA
CeliaGenishi,OhioStateUniversity
DonaldGraves,UniversityofNew
Hampshire
RobertGundlach,NorthwesternUniversity
JamesHahn,FairfieldHighSchool,
Fairfield,CA
AnneJ.Herrington,Universityof
Massachusetts
GeorgeHillocks,UniversityofChicago
SarahHudelson,ArizonaStateUniversity
JulieJensen,UniversityofTexas,Austin
JoKeroes,SanFranciscoStateUniversity
JaniceLauer,PurdueUniversity
AndreaLunsford,OhioStateUniversity
SusanLytle,UniversityofPennsylvania
AnnMatsuhashi,UniversityofIllinoisat
Chicago
MartyNystrand,UniversityofWisconsin
LeeOdell,RensselaerPolytechnicInstitute
SondraPerl,HerbertH.LehmanCollegeof
theCityUniversityofNewYork
GordonPradl,NewYorkUniversity
Victor:aPurcell-Gates,Universityof
Cincinnati
CharlesRead,Univers'tyofWisconsin
VictorRentel,OhioStateUniversity
WilliamSmith,UniversityofPittsburgh
JanaStaton,CenterforAppliedLinguistics,
Washington,DC
MichaelW.Stubbs,UniversitätTrier,
Germany
DeborahTannen,GeorgetownUniversity
BettyJaneWagner,NationalCollegeof
Education
SamuelD.Watson,UniversityofNorth
Carolina
GordonWells,OntarioInstituteforStudies
inEducation
Abstract
Thisstudyexploresacademicwritingfromthestudents'sideofthedesk,
examininghowdifferenttasksandwritingsituationsinfluencestudents'approaches.The
studyusesinterviewsandprocesslogsandexamineshow13collegefreshmeniaterpreted
writingassignmentsinavarietyofcoursesandhowtheseinterpretationsdifferedfrom
theirinstructors'intentions.Thesecasestudiesrevealthatstudentsdrawfromarangeof
individualandsituationalresourcesintheireffortstodefineandcompleteassignmentsand
thatthesefactorscaninteractincomplexwaystoshapestudents'approaches.Students'
responsestoassignmentsdependeduponwhattheywereactuallyrewardedforproducing.
Insomesituations,studentsreliedonshortcutstoproducepapersandfailedtoengagein
thekindsoflearningactivitiesthatassignmentsweredesignedtopromote.
writingsituationsinfluencestudents'efforts.Byexaminingwhenandhowstudents'
interpretationsofwritingassignmentsconvergeordivergefromtheirteachers'intentions,
wecanincreaseourunderstandingofhowcertainclassroompracticesandstudents'
assumptionsaffectstudentwriting.
Inaddition,suchresearchshouldleadtoaricher
understandingoftheconcernsandhabitsofstudentwritersworkingonacademictasksin
naturalsettings.Thisreportbeginswithadiscussionofthespecialnatureofclassroom
settingsandthecentralroleoftasksandaccountabilityinshapingstudents'learningand
writingeAperiences.Followingthisdiscussion,astudyisdescribedwhichexamineshow
variousfeaturesofspecificwritingassignmentsandclassroomsituationsinfluence
students'approaches,andhowdisjunctionsbetweenteachers'andstudents'task
interpretationsmightoccur.
THESPECIALNATUREOFSCHOOLSETTINGS
Althoughstudentwritingprocesseshavebeenwidelystudied(Emig,1971;Flower
&Hayes,1980b;Perl,1979;Pianko,1979;Sommers,1980),manyofthesestudieswere
conductedinsettingsinwhichthesubjectswereaskedtowritefortheoccasionofthe
researchprojectitself.Asaresult,muchofwhatweknowabouttheprocessesand
practicesofwritersduringcomposingcomesfromthisresearchsettingandnotfromthe
everydaycontextsinwhichpeoplenormallywrite(Brandt,1986).Unfortunately,tasksin
researchorlaboratoryseLingsmayposedifferentproblemsforwritersthantasksin
everydaysettings.
Researcherswhohavestudied"everydaycognition"innaturalsettings(Odell&
Goswami,1982;Rogoff&Gardner,1984;Scribner,1984)stresstheimportanceofsocial
factorsinshapingpeople'sapproachestoatask.AccordingtoRogoff(1984),"centralto
everydaycontextsinwhichcognitiveactivityoccursisinteractionwithotherpeopleand
useofsociallyprovidedtools... forsolvingproblems.... People,usuallyin
.-,oajunctionwitheachotherandalwaysguidedbysocialnorms,setgoals,negcdate
appropriatemeanstoreachthegoals,andassisteachotherinimplementingthemeansand
resettingthepalsasactivitiesevolve"(p.4).Theseresearchers'conclusionssuggestthat
ifwewanttounderstandthefactorsthatinfluencehowstudentsinterpretandrespondto
writingtasks,weneedtolocateourresearchinthecomplexsocialsettingsofactual
sciloolsandclassrooms.
Researchersinterestedinstudyingwritingprocessesintheclassroommusttakeinto
accountthespecialnatureofschoolsettings.Inanextensivereviewofeducational
research,Doyle(1933)explainsthat"academicworkistransformedfundamentallywhenit
isplacedinthecomplexsocialsystemofaclassroom"(p.185).Doyledescribesseveral
impoAantreasonsforthismansformation.PerhapsmostobviousLSthefactthatacademic
workisconductedinasocialf.,70up(theciass)wherestudentscanrelyontheirsocialand
imerpretiveskillstodefineandnegotiatetaskdemands.Hence,Doylereports,fellow
classmatescanserveasvaluableresourcesforaccomptishiagacademicwork.Peersnot
onlycanprovidedirectassistanceonassignments.butcanalsobeusedtosolicit
informationfromtheteacherabouttherequireme;iisforaparticulartask.Inotherwords,
assignmentscanbedefinedLndnegotiatedinthepublicforumoftheclassroom.
Anotherresourcethatstudentscanrelyonfoi?ccomplishingacademicworkisthe
historyoftheclassitself.Unlikelaboratorysettings,clhsseshaveahistorythatprovides
importantinformationabouttheevolvingnatureoftaskdemands.Students
canusethe
feedbacktheyreceiveonearlyassignmentstorefinetheirnotionsofwhat"counts"in
a
particularcourse.Doylc;reportsthatas"thecharacterofthetasksystembecomes
more
apparent,[s]tudentscanthenselectivelyattendtoinformationthathasconsequencesfor
7
taskaccomplishmentregardlessofwhetheritisexplicitlysignaledbytheteacher"(p.181).
WecanseehowclassroomhistoryservedasavaluableresourceforJohnincompletinghis
writingassignment.Becauseofearlyfeedbackhereceivedfromhisteachingassistant,
Johnselectivelyattendedtoinformationinthewritingassignment,ignoringthelength
restrictionandfocusingonsummarizingcoursematerial.Inaddition,John'scommentthat
"thisisanothercaseoftheinstructortryingtohaveuslearnthroughreiterationofread[ing]
material"suggeststhathewasdrawingfromhispreviousexperienceswithschoolwriting
ingeneral.Nodoubt,experiencegoingtoschoolestablisheswhatDoylecalls"task
schemata"(p.181)whichcanbeusedbystudentslikeJohntointerpretsimilartask
situations.
Oneofthemostimportantfeaturesdistinguishingacademicworkfromothertasks,
accordingtoDoyle,isthatittakesplaceinahighly"evaluativeclimate"(p.182)inwhich
gradesareexchangedforperformance.Asaresult,accountabilityintheformofthe
answersandprocessesstudentsareactuallyrewardedforbecomesthedrivingforce
behindhowstudentsrespondtoschoolassignments.Heexplainsthat"theanswersa
teacheractuallyaccep:sandrewardsdefinetherealtasksintheclassroom"(p.182).In
otherwords,studentslikeJolintendtotakeseriouclyonlytheworkforwhichtheyactually
areheldaccountable.
Thehighlyevaluativenatureofacademicworkcanposeproblemsforstudentswho
notonlymustsmuggletodefineoftenambiguoustasks,butmustweightherisksinvolved
inchoosingaparticularapproachoranswer.Manytasks(Doylecitesexpositorywriting
tasksinparticular)areambiguousnotbecauseteachersfailtoexplainthemclearlybut
becausethereisnotasingle"right"answerorprocedureforarrivingatanansweravailable
tostudentsinadvance.Studentsmustinterpretassignmentsandformulateresponseson
theirown,acomplexprocessthatcanprovetroublesomeandsometimesleadto
disjunctionsbetweenstudents'approachesandteachers'intentions.Doyledescribes
severalstudies(Carter&Doyle,1982;Dillon&Searle,1981;Graves,1973;MacKay,
1978)whichsuggestthatstudentsinventstrategiesformanagingtheambiguityandrisk
involvedinaccomplishingclassroomtanks.Thesestrategiesincludeofferingprovisional
orrestrictedresponsestoassignmentsandquesdonsasawaytoelicitmoreinformation
fromteachersaboutthecorrectresponse,andrequestingthattheteachermaketask
instructionsmoreexplicitorprovidemodelstofollowclosely.Eachofthesecoping
strategiesprovidesstudentswithvaluableinformationaboutwhatreallycountsin
completingaparticulararsignment.Inaddition,thesestrategiesallowstudentstofocus on
theproducts theyarerequiredtoproduceinsteadofontheprocesses theyarebeingasked
toengagein.
Thus,whilethesecopingstrategiesmaylessentheambiguityandrisk
inherentinacademicwork,theymayalsoprovidestudentswithshortcutsforproducing
acceptableresponsesshortcutsthatallowthemtocircumventthethinkingandlearning
processestheirteachershopetopromote.
Thisbriefsummaryofrelatedresearchrevealsjusthowimportantthespecial nature
ofschoolsettingscanbeinshapingstudents'responsestoacademictasks.What emerges
fromthisdiscussionisaviewofacademicworkfromthestudent'ssideofthedesk.We
seestudnitstakingadvantageofseveralfeaturesofclassroomenvironmentsintheirefforts
todefineandfulfilltheirteachers'assignments.Theyrelyontheirpeers,ontheircurrent
andlong-termexperienceswithschoolwork,andonvariouscopingstrategies todetermine
whatcountsincompletingaparticularassignmentfor
aparticularcourse."Successful"
studentsarethose,likeJohn,whocandeterminewhatconstitutes anappropriateresponse
throughtheirinteractionswithteachersandclassmates.
2.Howdostudents'taskinterpretationsandapproachesrelatetotheirteachers'
statedgoalsforassigningwriting?
3.Underwhatconditionsdostudentsrelyoncopingstrategiestocircumventthe
demandsofwritingassignments?
Participants
Writingassignments,likeotheracademictasks,aresubjecttointerpretationand
negotiationwithinthecomplexsocialsystemoftheclassroomandschool.Forthisreason,
Ihavefounditusefultoapproachthestudyofnaturally-occurringwritingtasksasaseries
ofcasestudies.
Thismethodhasallowedmetoexaminehowparticulartasksare
conceptualizedbyteachersandstudentsandhowtheseconceptualizationsconvergeor
diverge.
Overthecourseofasemester(4months)Iexaminedhow13freshmanstudents
interpretedandrespondedtothewritingassignmentstheyreceivedinavarietyofcourses.
Theseparticipantswereselectedfromtheclassrostersof7coursesintheArts,Sciences,
andHumanitiesatCarnegieMellonUniversity.Thesecourses(identifiedthrougha
survey)allrequiredstudenttowriteacademicpapers.Bylookingatstudentsworkingina
rangeofdisciplines,Ihopedtogetasampleofthekindsofwritingsituationsandtasks
studentsencounteracrossthecurriculum.Studentswereselectedonthebasisoftheir
scoresontheSAT-verbalexam,theonlymeasureoflanguageabilityavailableforall
students.Ineachcourseorrecitationsection,twostudentswereselectedasparticipants,
onestudentwithalowscoreandonestudentwithahighscoreincomparisontotherestof
themembersofthecourse.(Duringthecourseofmystudy,onestudentwithdrewfrom
schoolandcouldnolongerparticipate.)Thisselectionprocesspermittedmetoexamine
howstudentswithdifferentscoresonthismeasurerespondedtofeaturesoftheirwriting
assignmentsandsituations.
DataCollection
Myresearchmethodsincludedcollectingofdetailedwritingprocesslogsinwhich
studentsdescribedallaspectsoftheworktheycompletedforpapers;collectingofallnotes,
drafts,andgradedpaperstheparticipantsproducedduringthesemester,andinterviewing
boththeparticipantsandtheirteachers.
ThewritinglogskeptbytheparticipantsincluthAdescriptionsofallpaper-related
activities,suchasreading,thinking,conductinglibraryresearch,talking,andwriting.
OnceparticipantsbeganthinkingaboutorworkingOnapaper,theywererequiredtowrite
dailylogentries(eveniftheydidnotactuallyworkonpaperseveryday)andwereaskedto
deliverentriesandcopiesofnotesordraftsonaregularschedule,atleastthreetimes
a
week.
Thefindingsofotherresearchers(Faigley,Cherry,Jolliffe,&Skinner,1985;
Sternglass&Pugh,1986)revealthebenefitsofusingwritinglogsasaresearchtoolfor
examiningtheconcernsandprocessesofwritersworkinginnaturalsettingsoverextended
periodsoftime.SternglassandPugh(1986),intheirsemester-longstudyofthereading
andwritingprocessesofgraduatestudents,argueforthevueofretrospective
accounts.
Theyfoundthatretrospectiveorconcurrentjournalaccounts"are
arichsourceof
informationbecausetheypermitconsiderationofthecomplexcontextwithinwhich
composingoccurs"(p.297). Whileretrospectivereportscanrevealsometimesin
remarkabledetailwhatinformationwritersattendtowhentheyinterpretandcomplete
theirtasks,thevalidityofsuchreportscannotbedeterminedinanydefinitiveway.(See
Cooper&Holzman,1983;Ericcson&Simon,1980;Morris,1981;Nisbett&Wilson,
1977;Tomlinson,1984fordiscussionsaboutthevalueandvalidityofretrospective
accountsoflanguageprocessessuchasthosegatheredinwritinglogs.)
Theinterviewswithparticipantsinthecurrentstudywereopen-endedbutalso
includedquestionsaboutstudents'initialresponsestospecificwritingassignments,how
difficulttheythoughtthepaperwouldbetowrite,howwelltheythoughttheydidon
assignments,andhowtheyinterpretedteachers'commentsandgrades. Inadditionto
interviewswithstudents,Ialsointerviewedtheirteachersandaskedthemtodiscuss:(1)
whytheygiveparticularwritingassignments,(2)howtheystructurewritingassignments,
and(3)howtheyevaluatepapers.Thisinformationallowedmetocompareteachers'stated
goalsandpurposesforassigningwritingwiththeactualgoalsandprocessesstudents
broughttospecificwritingtasksasrevealedintheirlogsandinterviews.
Analyses
Thedatacollectedprovedtobeveryrich. Itconsistedofover700pagesof
material,includingwritingprocesslogsfromthe13participants;copiesofalltheir
assignments,notes,drafts,andgradedpapers;andtranscriptionsornotesfrominterviews
withthestudentsandtheirteachers.Mygoalinanalyzingtheseextensivematerialswasto
examine,assystematicallyaspossible,(1)howwritingtaskswereconceived,presented,
andevaluatedbyteachers;(2)howthesetaskswereinterpretedandcompletedbystudents;
(3)howvarioussituationalandindividualresourcesinfluencedstudents'approaches.
ToaccomplishthisgoalIidentifiedseveralfactorsforanalyzingtheteacher'sand
thestudent'sversionofindividualwritingtasks. Inordertounderstandtheteacher's
conceptualizationofawritingtask,theanalysisfocusedinparticularonthefollowing
areas:
1.Teacher'sstatedgoalsforassigningwriting.
2.Teacher'spresentationoftheassignmenttostudents,includinganyresourcesor
proceduresstudentswereexpectedtousetocompletetheirtask.
3.Teacher'sexplanationsofthecriteriausedtoevaluatestudents'papers.
Theanalysisofthestudent'sconceptualizationofawritingtaskfocused
onthekindsof
resourceseachstudentmightrelyontointerpretandcompleteassignments.These
resourcescouldinclude:
Student'sunderstandingofthepurposeoftheassignmentandthecriteriaused
inawardinggrades.
2.Student'sunderstandingoftheproceduresandresourcestobeusedtocomplete
theassignment.
Student'srepertoireof"productionsystems"orstrategiesforcompletingcertain
kindsofschoolwritingtasks.
4.Student'spastexperiencesinthecourse.
Student'spastexperienceswiththesubjectmatterbeingcoveredinthe course.
6.Student'stimeandeffortallocation.
7.Student'scollaborationswithpeersinthecourse.
CaseStudy1.SociologyWritingTask:ReportsofFieldwork
Likemanyuniversities,CarnegieMellonrequiresenteringfreshmentotakeaseries
of'corecourses"intheArts,Science,andHumanities.Suchcoursesareoftenlarge(over
100students)andtaughtbylecturerswiththehelpofteachingassistants,whoconduct
weeklyrecitationsectionsand,moreoftenthannot,gradestudents'work.Thewriting
tasksdescribedbelowwereassignedin"SocialInfluences,"acoursethatallfreshmen
enrolledinthecollegeofHumanitiesandSocialSciencesarerequiredtotake.InSocial
Influences,writingassignmentsweredesignedbytheprofessorandthenpresentedto
studentsandgradedbyteachingassistantsinindividualrecitationordiscussionsections.
Thispracticewhilepracticalandcommonplacecomplicatesourattempttoexaminehow
writingtasksarenegotiatedanddefinedinclassrooms.InthecaseofSocialInfluences,
writingusignmentscanundergotwopossibletransformations:first,whenteaching
assistantsinterpretandtranslatetheprofessor'sassignmentfortheirindividualsections;
andsecond,whenstudentsinterpretandrespondtotheirsectionleader'sassignment.In
ordertoaccountforthepossibilityofdifferencesamongtheprofessor's,teaching
assistant's,andstudent'sversionofawritingassignment,Ichosetoexaminehowwriting
assignmentswerepresentedintwoseparaterecitationsectionsandhowatotaloffour
students(twofromeachsection)definedandcompletedthesetasks.Whilethefollowing
discussionfocusesononlytwoofthesefourstudents'approaches,theconcluding
discussiondescribeshowallfourstudentsdefinedandapproachedtheirwritingtasksfor
SocialInfluences.
Professor'sVersionoftheAssignment
Conceptualizationofthetask'sgoals. Duringanhour-longinterview,
ProfessorSmithexplainedthatthewritingassignmentsforthe
courseconsistedofthree
papersthatweredesignedto"buildoneachother."Eachassignmentrequiredthatstudents
conductfieldworkaspartoftheirresearchandwritea5-7pagereport.
Thefirst
assignmentwasintendedtohelpstudents"tosystemizetheirobservationsandexperiences"
byaskingthemtogathermaterialanduseittopresentvalidconclusionsabout
"socialization"processesatCarnegieMellon.Dr.Smithexplainedthatforthisbeginning
assignment,itwasimportant"toimpressonstudentsthefactthatreadersdon'tknowwhat
theydo"andthattheyshould"learntowriteforanuninformedaudience."Thesecond
paperrequiredstudentstodofieldworkandexaminehowpowerrelationsaremanifestedat
CarnegieMellon.
ProfessorSmithdescribedthreegoalsforthisassignment:
toget
studentstoselectandorganizedataforanargument;
tousethetheoriesandconcepts
discussedinclasstoframethesearguments;tounderstandthe
useofcomparativedata.
Thethirdandfinalpaper,whilesimilartotheothers,placed"greaterdemands"
on
students.Forthispaper,studentswereexpectedtoinclude"fielddata,comparative
data
fromthereadings,andkeyconceptsfromthecourse."Inaddition,a"highpremium"was
tobeplacedonhowthepaperwaspresented.
Inresponsetoquestionsaboutwhyshegavewritingassignmentsinhercourse,
ProfessorSmithexplainedthat"writingis
awayoflearning,ofintegratingideasand
experiences.
Ithelpsstudentstogobeyondcoursecontent,tolearnhow
tosystemize
what'shappeningtothem."Thus,shebelievedthatwritingcouldplay
acentralrolenot
onlyinhelpingstudentstolearncoursematerial,butinallowing
themtorelatethisnew
materialtotheirownexperiences.
Presentationoftheassignment.Allthreeassignments
weredescribedbriefly
intheeleven-pagecoursesyllabus.According tothesyllabus,eachpaperwasworth15%
ofastudent'scoursegrade,thesameweight
asthemid-termexam.Thus,gradesforall
threepapersaccountedfornearlyhalf(45%)ofthestudent'sgrade,revealing thatwriting
didindeedplayanimportantroleinthe course.
ProfessorSmithprovidedteachingassistantswith
adetaileddescriptionofthe
requirementsforeachassignment,includingthekindsofinformation
thepapershould
includeandthecriteriaforgrading.Forexample,sherecommended thatpapersbegraded
ona100-pointscale,with80pointsfor"content"(dataandmethod;conceptsandthecries;
analysis,conclusions,useofcomparativematerial)and20points
for"presentation"
(descriptionofdata;styleoft wholepaper).Inamemototeachingassistantsdescribing
thefirstpaper,sheexplained'mat"Irealizethattheabove
[descriptionofrequirements]
givesabitmorethanyoumightwant tosaytostudents.Useitasageneralframeworkfor
instructingstudents."Severalteachingassistantsrespondedby usingthesedescriptionsto
generateasomewhatshorterlistofguidelineswhichtheyhanded
outtostudentsintheir
sections.Theseguidelinesturned
outtoplayanimportantroleindetermininghow
studentsapproachedtheassignments.
TwoTeachingAssistants'VersionsoftheAssignment
Sometimeduringthemiddleofthesemester, twostudentsfromdifferentsections
ofSocialInfluenceswerecaughtplagiarizing.Apparently,onestudenthandedinapaper
thatafellowclassmatehadwrittenandturnedin toanothersectionleader.Afterthisevent
becamtpublicknowledge,severalstudentscomplained
totheprofessorthatstudentsin
differentsectionsreceivedanunfairadvantage
ontheirpapersbecausetheirteaching
assistantshandedoutexplicitguidelinesforcompleting
paperswhileothersdidnot.In
answertothesecomplaints,ProfessorSmithdecidedthatstudentsinall
sectionsshould
receivethesamedetailedguidelinesforassignments.
Consequently,bothteachingassistantsinthesections
Istudiedpresentedtheir
studentswiththesameseven-pointlistof
stepsforcompletingthesecondpaper.Eachof
thesevenstepsstudentsweretofollowincludedadvice,examples,orquestions
tohelp
themfocusonkeyissues.Forexample,thesecond
stepdirectedstudentsto:"State your
assumption;whatareyougoing
totestinyourstudy?"(SeeAppendixforthecomplete
guidelines.)
EventhoughthetwoteachingassistantsI
interviewedpresentedthe
same
assignmenttostudents,theydescribeddifferent concernsaboutshapingandrespondingto
studentwriting.SectionleaderStevensexplained thattheworstadviceteachers cangiveis
"totellstudentstobeclear."Hetells
students"ifyou'renotconfused,you're
not
learning."Becausehebelievedthatstudents
needto'struggletodefineandexpresstheir
ideas,Stevensdidnotlikegivingstudents
outlinesorguidelinestofollowfortheir papers.
Infact,ononesetof
paperguidelineshewrote"SecurityBlanketGuidediscard
assoon
aspossible."Hefeltthattheseguidelinestook
toomuchofthe"struggle"and,hence,the
learningoutoftheassignments.
Whenaskedhowhelikedtorespondtostudentpapers,Stevensexplainedthathe
preferredtorespondatdifferent stagesinorderto"tracetheirprogress,howtheirthinking
isevolving."Heliked
toaskstudentsquestionsabouttheirideasandmethods,andto
"keeppushing."Healsoencouraged
studentstoconsiderrewritingand
resubmitting
papers.
Incontrast,sectionleaderToddbelieved
ingivingstudentsclearadvice
for
producingpapers.Hespent alargeportionofhisweeklyrecitationmeetingdiscussing
the
secondpaperwithstudents,tellingthem
topayparticularattentiontotheir"method
4
theirpapersandbringthemtoclassfordiscussion.Art
wroteabout"towhatextent
professorsandteachingassistantscananddo
usetheirpower."Ifthegoalofthisactivity
wastocheckhowstudents'workwasevolving,itseemedtohavefailedinArt's case,who
reportedthathedidn'ttalkabouthisopeninganddidn't
paymuchattentiontothe
discussionbecausehewastooworriedabouttheupcomingmid-term exam.
Whenhereturnedtotheassignmenttendayslater(just
twodaysoeforethepaper
wasdue),Artreported,"Ichangedmytopicfromthepowerofprofessors
tothepowerof
sportsfigureditwouldbeeasiersinceI'minvolvedwithsports."
Hethenreportedthat
he"startedwritingeverythingfromthe topof[his]head;saidthat[he]hadinteriiewedthe
coachandinteractedwithteammatesbutreallydidn't."Essentially, Artfabricatedhisfield
report.Whilewritingthepaper,Artsaidhewatched abasketballgameontelevision,and
tooksr.7..ralbreakstorestandtalktofriends.Whenhe gotstuckinhiswriting,helooked
atthepaperguidelinesforhelp.Hefinishedhispaperinfourhoursandtypedit
onthe
computerthenextday,makingonlyminor,word-levelchanges.Aswiththe
firstpaper,
Artreportedthat"always,throughoutthe
paper,[I]constantlykepttrackofhowmany
wordsIhadwritten."Infollow-upinterviews,Artexplained
thatheusedtheseven-step
assignmentguidelinestocomposethe paper:"Ireadthrougheachstepandtriedtoanswer
it."Interestinglyenough,Artproduced aseven-paragraphpaper.
Approximatelytwoweeksbeforeherpaperonpowerwasdue,Barbarawrote:
IthinkthatI'mgonnawrite mypaperonthepoweroffraternitiesbecauseItalked
tomyroommateandshehelpedmethinkofdifferentoptionsforthe
paper....
Sinceaguidelinewasgiventohelp
usfocusontheissuesforourpaper,I'llbe
basicallyansweringthequestionsgiveninthisguideline andhopefullymyanswers
willstretchto4-6pages.
Aweeklatershereportedthatshehad"no
newideasprobablyworkbetterunder
spontaneity."
Shedidvisitherteachingassistant,
asplanned,butapparentlyusedthisvisittoget
anextensiononthepaper'sduedateandnottodiscussher
work.Whenshefinallysat
downtowriteherpaper,her strategywasremarkablysimilartoArt's.Sheexplained:
Whilelookingatthcguidelinethatwashandedtousearlier,andalsothehintsgiven
inrecitation,I waskindaoverwhelmedwithallthequestionstobeincludedin our
papers! IguessIdidn'treallyknowhow
toorganizeit.
However,beingthe
spontaneouspersonthatIam,IfinallythoughtthatIshould
justwritetheideas
downastheycameinmindand
trytoreferbacktotheguidelineifIwanted
to
answermorequestions.
LikeArt,shedidnoactualplanningorfieldresearchandrelied
onthedetailedquestionsin
theassignmentsheetto generateherpaper.
Evaluation.
Artreceived75outof100possiblepoints
forthispaper.
His
instructor(Stevens)wrotethreequestions attheendofhispaper:(1)Howdoesthecoach
regulatethebehaviorofathletes?(2)Which
behaviorsarelegitimatelyregulatedby
the
coach?(3)Whatevidencewould
youneedtobackuptheclaimsmade?SinceArtdid not
plantorevisethepaper,hedidnotfindthesecommentsparticularlyuseful,
explainingthat
hisihstnictorwas"agoodteacher,
butexpectstoomuch."Artsaidhe
wassatisfiedwith
thisgradeandthathis"teacher's commentsdon'treallymatter."ApparentlyStevens' goal
to"keeppushing"studentsbyaskingthemquestions
abouttheirresearchdid notalways
succeed.Artfoundhisfeedbacklargely useless.
Barbara'srecitationteacher(Todd)wroteextensivecriticalcommentsinthemargins
ofherpaper,pointingoutthatsheincludedirrelevantinformationinherreport,andfailed
toprovideanydetailabouthermethodsorobservations.Inhisfinalcommentshewrote,
"Ithinkyouarecapableofmuchbetterwork,Barbara"andgaveheraB-.Infollow-up
interviews,Barbararevealedthatsheagreedwithherteacher'scomments,saying"Iknew
itwasabadpaperwhenIhandeditinIdidn'tdoanyrealresearch."Shefeltthathis
criticisms"madesense"andsaid,"Hiscommentswillletmewriteabetterfinalpaper."
However,inspiteoftheseprojections,Barbara'ssystemforwritingherthirdand
finalpaperforthecoursefollowedthesamepatternasbefore.Shecomposeditatthe
computeronthedayitwasdue("rightbeforeclass"),usingtheassignmentsheettoreferto
ifshedidnothaveanythingtosay.
Students'Interpretatj9ns,Resources,andCopingStrategies
SeveralfactorsseemedtoenterintoArt'sresponsetothisassignment.Timeand
effortallocationwerekeptataminimumhestoppedwritingwhenhehadproduced
enoughwordstofulfillthelengthrequirement.Theseven-steppaperguidelinesfurnished
byhisteacherprovedtobeanespeciallyvaluableresource.Theseguidelinesservedasa
promptandhelpedhimtoproducea"fieldstudy"withouteveractuallycollectinganydata.
Thus,Art'spredispositiontoexpendminimaleffortonthewritingassignmentsmay
actuallyhavebeenfosteredbytheresourceshisteacherprovided.Finally,becausethe
teacher'sevaluationofhispaperandsuggestionsforfurtheranalysiswerenuttiedtoany
requiredrevision,ArtdecidedthatStevens'commentscouldbeignored.
Throughoutherinterviewsandlogentries,Barbarareferredtoherselfasa
"spontaneous"writerwhose"usualapproach"wastoputoffassignmentsand"workunder
pressure"atthelastminute.Earlyoninthecourse,afterherfirstpaper,sherealizedthat
thismethodforproducingpaperswouldnotworkforthefieldreportsshewasbeingasked
towrite.Inspiteofthisrealizationandpromisestochangeher.ways,Barbaracontinuedto
putoffplanningandwritinguntiljustbeforeherpapersweredue.AswithArt,itappears
thattheexplicitpaperguidelinesshereceivedenabledhertocontinuetorelyonthis
efficient"productionsystem"(Nespor,1987,p.214).Theguidelinesserved
asasortof
papergeneratorforbothstudents,allowingthemtocircumventtheassignment'sprocess
requirementsandproducefairlyacceptableproducts.
Inmanyways,thesetwostudents'shortcutsforproducingacceptablepapers
are
sensible.Rogoff(1984)andotherresearchersstressthepracticalandopportunisticnature
ofcognitiveactivitiesineverydaysettings.Rogoff(1984)explainsthat"thinkingis
a
practicalactivitywhichisadjustedtomeetthedemandsofthesituation.
... Ratherthan
employingformalapproachesv
solvingproblems,peopledevisesatisfactory,
opportunisticsolutions"(p.7).Asmentionedearlier,atotaloffourstudents(twoineach
recitationsection)wereobservedinthiscourse,andthreeoutofthesefourstudentschose
nottousetheresearchmethodstheyhadbeentaughttoplanandproducetheirpapers.
Instead,theyadjustedtheirapproachestomeetthedemandsofthesituation,whichthey
believedcalledforpapersthatclearlymatchedthestepsoutlinedintheirdetailedassignment
guidelines.Onestudentwasevenastuteenoughtofabricateherdataandconclusions
so
thattheymatchedtheideasraisedinclasslectures.However,whilethesethreestudeus
foundthepaperguidelinesveryhelpful,thestudentwhodidtrytocompletetheassignment
ashisteacherintendedcomplainedthattheexplicitguidelinesco-optedhisownideasby
forcinghimtofollowaseriesofsteps.Hedescribedthepaperguidelinesasa"narrow
constriction"whichhefeltobligedtofollowandexplainedthat"it seemsasifwe'rebeing
gradedonhowwellwecanfollowdirections,nothowwethink onourown."
TheTeachingAssistant'sVersionoftheAssignment
Inaninterview,section-leaderColemancomplainedthatengineeringstudentswere
notaskedtowriteenoughintheirothercoursesandasaresultwereoften"output
illiterate."Whenrespondingtostudentwriting,hefeltthatitwasimportanttolookfor
featuresof"competentwriting"suchas"completesentences,spelling,organization,and
evidence."Healsolookedforparticular"contentfeatures"whichconsistedofkeypoints
fromthecoursereadings.(Thisemphasison"contentfeatures"whenevaluatingstudents'
performanceontheassignmentdifferedfromProfessorClark'sstatedcriteriaforthe
assignment.)Colemansaidthatwhilehelikedtogivestudents"meaningfulfeedback"and
to"tellstudentswaystoimprovetheirwriting,"hefoundthattherewasn'tenoughtimein
theweeklyrecitationsectionstodiscusswriting.
Students'VersionsoftheAssignment:JohnandJudy
Conceptualizingthetask.
Asnotedearlier,Johndescribedthisasaneasy
assignment.Hehadalreadycompletedaverysimilarwritingtaskforthe course,onethat
likewisehada200-wordlimit.Heexplainedthatitrequiredthewriter
to"presentan
argumentbasedonevidencethatwasallthere"intheassignedmaterial."Ifeltlikeit was
BSbasicallyitcalledforreiteratingwhatwe'dbeengiven."
Judyhadasimilarresponsetothisassignment,sayingitwasn't"motivating"and
thatthe200-wordlimitwas"utterlyridiculous."Shefoundthisconstraintespecially
troublingbecauseitinterferedwithher"normalapproach"
towritingschoolpapers.She
likedtousethe"trianglemethod"fordevelopingherintroductory
andconcluding
paragraphs,apopulartechniqueshehadlearnedinhighschool.However,becauseofthe
lengthrestrictionforthistask,shehadtolimitherintroductionandconclusion onnerfirst
papertojusttwosentences,andwasverysurprisedthatshereceivedfullcreditforher
paper,whichshebelievedwaspoorlywritten.Shealsosaidthatshewouldhavepreferred
morefreedominwritingthesepapersbecauseitwasnearlyimpossibletopresent"enough
evidence"injust200hundredwords.
LikeJohn,Judyunderstoodherteacher'sgradingcriteria
tobebasedon"alistof
ideas"fromthereadingsandlectures,andsheexplainedthat acheck"meantthatyou'dhit
one."
Planningandcomposingthe
paper.Johnexplainedthatashewasreading
theassignedmaterialsthenightbeforethepaperwasdue,he"formulatedthereportin[his]
head,"pickingoutnamesandeventstomentioninhis paper.Inhislastlogentry,hesaid,
"Essentially,IparaphrasedthereportsIread ...
Nogreatinsightsonthispapersorry!"
Judytooknotesfromtheassignedreadingstoprepareforwritingthepaper,butshe
limitedherreadingandnote-takingstrategiestofitthelimitsoftheassignment,saying,"I
justskimmedtheassignedarticleslookingforblurbsabout
thetopicIdon'tneedalotof
details."Latershereported,"My
notesforthisassignmentareprettysparseohwell,the
lessIhavetoworkwiththebetter,I suppose,sinceI'mlimitedto200wordsanyway."
Evenwithher"sparse"notes,Judyproduced afirstdraftthatwas739wordslong.
Sheproducedtwomoredraftsandkept"lookingforshorterwaystosaythings"untilshe
hadcutover300words.In
anotetoherteachingassistantattachedtothisfinalversion,
shesaid,"Consideringthemajorchop-jobIdidonmylastpaper,Iabsolutelyrefusedto
grindthispaperupanymore.Itissimplyagainst mywritingprinciples."
19
Evaluation.Johnproduced
a412-wordpaperandreceivedNI11credit(2outof
points).Histeacher'sfeedbackconsistedoffourcheckmarks
inthepaper'smarginand
threebriefcomments,oneofwhichtoldhimthathis
paperwas"alittlelongerthan
necessary."Johnsaidthathefoundthiswritingassignment"awasteofclasstime."
Judyalsoreceivedfullcreditforher
paper.Herteacher'sfeedbackconsistedof
fivechecksinthemarginand
twowordsinthetextmarkedwithquestionsmarks.Not
surprisingly,Judysaidthatshejustlooked atthegradesshereceivedot,tnesepapersand
didnotbothertolookat anyothermarksorcomments.
Students'Interpretations,Resources,andCoping
Strategies
EventhoughProfessorClarkintendedthisassignment
tobechallenging,the
studentsIstudiedfoundit"unmotivating"
ora"wasteoftime."UnlikeJohn,Judydid
struggletomakeherpapermo-e
t.oncise,butfounditimpossibletomeetthe100-word
limit,aconstraintthatshenot)nlyfound
arbitraryandcountertowhatshehadlearned
aboutgoodwritinginpastcourses,butwhichseemed
toshapeherlimitedreadingand
note-takingstrategies.Johnseemed
toobjectmoretothenatureoftheassignmentitself,
whichonthesurfaceaskedstudents
totakeastandonanissue,butinrealitycalledfor
"reiterating"whattheyhadread.
Thus,twofeaturesofthetaskitselfseemed
toinfluencestudents'responses:the
limitedpurposefortheassignment(i.e., toshowthatstudentshadreadandcomprehended
coursematerial);andtheseeminglyarbitrarylengthrestriction.In addition,bothstudents
appearedtobasetheirtaskinterpretationsand subsequentresponsesoninformationabout
taskrequirementsgainedfromtheirinteractionwiththeteachingassistantinthe
course.In
otherwords,asthenatureoftheirteacher'sgrading
sys,mbecamemoreapparent,they
wereableto"selectivelyattendtoinformationthat[had]
consequencesfortask
accomplishment"(Doyle,p.181),namelytheproduction ofpaperswithiiiformationthat
matchedthefactsontheirteacher'slistof "contentfeatures."Itappearsinthis casethat,as
Doylesuggests,the"answers
ateacheractuallyacceptsandrewardsdefinetherealtasksin
theclassroom"(p.182).
Bothstudentsbroughtindividualexperiences whichalsomayhaveplayed arolein
shapingtheirnegative responses.Johnalludedtothefactthathehadencountered similar
assignmentsinwhichtheteacherusedwriting totestwhetherstudentshadlearned course
material.Apparentlyhehaddeveloped
afairlyefficientsystemforcompletingsuch
assignments,thoughhefoundthem awasteoftime.
Incontrast,Judyhadlearnedaparticularmethodfordevelopingacademic
essays
whichdidnotmatchtheconstraintsof
thisspecificassignmentandmayhaveinterfered
withherabilitytoproduce
abrief200-wordargument.Infact,Judysaidthatinher
previousEnglishclass,hermajorwriting problemhadbeenthatshepresented goodideas
butfailedtodevelopthem.Ironically, fortheengineeringassignment,shewasexpectedto
condenseherideas,butarguedthatthis requirementwent"againstherwriting principles."
Itappearsthatbothstudents'previous
experiencesinteractedwiththesituational variables
discussedaboveandhadanimpactontheirapproachestothisassignment.
CaseStudy3.LiteratureWritingTask:ResearchPaper
ontheVicturianEra
Thisfinalcasestudyexamines
theteacher'sandstudents'versions
ofaresearch
paperassignmentgivenin"ReadingTexts,"
afreshmanliteraturecoursethatstudents(who
qualifybyscoringabove500pointsontheSAT-verbalexam)mayelect
totakeinplaceof
