大学生对写作选择的认知

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Angelique Aitken, Steve Graham
{"title":"大学生对写作选择的认知","authors":"Angelique Aitken, Steve Graham","doi":"10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"There is an assumption in education that allowing students to choose their writing topics and positions is beneficial; however, there is little research to support this belief, particularly from the students’ perspectives. In the present study, we conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with students at a large university in the Southwest of the United States after they completed two in-class argumentative writing assignments in a course on exceptional children, one where they chose their writing position and one where they were assigned their writing position. As a group, these 20 students (13 female, 7 male) were above average writers in their first to third year of study, and the majority of them were education majors (70%), followed by arts and sciences (25%), and design and the arts (5%). The interview protocol focused upon their shifting perspectives on the underlying motivational construct of choice related to this and other writing assignments. Taking a grounded theory approach to thematic analysis, findings indicated that having choice in writing was important because it allowed students to write about topics that they find easier, more interesting, and possess greater knowledge. Choice also allowed students to demonstrate their autonomy, which they believed, influenced their motivation and writing quality/grades. While the university students in this study generally preferred choice, a majority of them identified benefits of not choosing, including opportunities to improve writing tenacity, enhance their writing skills, and achieve new perspectives.","PeriodicalId":45632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Writing Research","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of choice in writing of university students\",\"authors\":\"Angelique Aitken, Steve Graham\",\"doi\":\"10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"There is an assumption in education that allowing students to choose their writing topics and positions is beneficial; however, there is little research to support this belief, particularly from the students’ perspectives. In the present study, we conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with students at a large university in the Southwest of the United States after they completed two in-class argumentative writing assignments in a course on exceptional children, one where they chose their writing position and one where they were assigned their writing position. As a group, these 20 students (13 female, 7 male) were above average writers in their first to third year of study, and the majority of them were education majors (70%), followed by arts and sciences (25%), and design and the arts (5%). The interview protocol focused upon their shifting perspectives on the underlying motivational construct of choice related to this and other writing assignments. Taking a grounded theory approach to thematic analysis, findings indicated that having choice in writing was important because it allowed students to write about topics that they find easier, more interesting, and possess greater knowledge. Choice also allowed students to demonstrate their autonomy, which they believed, influenced their motivation and writing quality/grades. While the university students in this study generally preferred choice, a majority of them identified benefits of not choosing, including opportunities to improve writing tenacity, enhance their writing skills, and achieve new perspectives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Writing Research\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Writing Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.03\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Writing Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2023.15.02.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

教育中有一种假设,允许学生选择写作主题和立场是有益的;然而,很少有研究支持这种观点,特别是从学生的角度来看。在本研究中,我们对美国西南部一所大型大学的学生进行了20次半结构化访谈,他们在一门关于特殊儿童的课程中完成了两项课堂议论文写作作业,其中一项是他们选择写作位置,另一项是他们被分配写作位置。作为一个整体,这20名学生(13名女性,7名男性)在一到三年级的写作水平高于平均水平,其中大多数是教育专业(70%),其次是艺术和科学(25%),以及设计和艺术(5%)。访谈协议侧重于他们对与此和其他写作任务相关的选择的潜在动机结构的转变观点。采用扎根理论的方法进行主题分析,研究结果表明,在写作中有选择是很重要的,因为它允许学生写他们觉得更容易,更有趣的主题,并拥有更多的知识。选择也让学生展示了他们的自主性,他们认为这影响了他们的动机和写作质量/成绩。虽然在这项研究中,大学生普遍倾向于选择,但他们中的大多数人认为不选择的好处,包括提高写作韧性的机会,提高他们的写作技巧,并获得新的视角。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perceptions of choice in writing of university students
There is an assumption in education that allowing students to choose their writing topics and positions is beneficial; however, there is little research to support this belief, particularly from the students’ perspectives. In the present study, we conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with students at a large university in the Southwest of the United States after they completed two in-class argumentative writing assignments in a course on exceptional children, one where they chose their writing position and one where they were assigned their writing position. As a group, these 20 students (13 female, 7 male) were above average writers in their first to third year of study, and the majority of them were education majors (70%), followed by arts and sciences (25%), and design and the arts (5%). The interview protocol focused upon their shifting perspectives on the underlying motivational construct of choice related to this and other writing assignments. Taking a grounded theory approach to thematic analysis, findings indicated that having choice in writing was important because it allowed students to write about topics that they find easier, more interesting, and possess greater knowledge. Choice also allowed students to demonstrate their autonomy, which they believed, influenced their motivation and writing quality/grades. While the university students in this study generally preferred choice, a majority of them identified benefits of not choosing, including opportunities to improve writing tenacity, enhance their writing skills, and achieve new perspectives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Writing Research
Journal of Writing Research EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
16
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Writing Research is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes high quality theoretical, empirical, and review papers covering the broad spectrum of writing research. The Journal primarily publishes papers that describe scientific studies of the processes by which writing is produced or the means by which writing can be effectively taught. The journal is inherently cross-disciplinary, publishing original research in the different domains of writing research. The Journal of Writing Research is an open access journal (no reader fee - no author fee).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信