Cover not available
To be specified published In:
Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education
Vol. 5:2 (2017) ► pp.265–290
Dissertation

A sociocognitive model of interventions for writing instruction

 | University of New Brunswick
This summary reports on an ethnographic study conducted in French immersion concerning the writing development of at-risk and typically developing writers. Eight Grade 7 writers – four at-risk and four typically developing – were observed closely during classroom observations and participated in think-aloud protocols at the beginning and at the end of the school year 2012–2013 as well as in formal and informal interviews. In addition, the context in which those eight writers were learning to write was taken into consideration, therefore a total of 20 students participated in this study. Four teachers, the resource teacher, the counselor, and the two administrators were informants. Adopting a sociocognitive lense, the data reported here provide a detailed description of how the socioaffective, affective, and academic domains affected writing development, especially for at-risk writers. In order to respond to the affective and social needs of the writers of this study, a Sociocognitive Model of Interventions for Writing Instruction is proposed.
Keywords: writing development, at-risk writers, typically developing writers, inclusion, French immersion
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical framework and literature review
    • 2.1Sociocognitive theory
    • 2.2.Inclusion
    • 2.3Evidence-based writing practices
    • 2.4Empirical studies about writing in FI
    • 2.5At-risks writers in FI
  • 3.Research questions
  • 4.Methodology
    • 4.1Participants and sample
    • 4.2Data collection
    • 4.3Data analysis
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Description and milieu analysis
    • 5.2Socioaffective domain
      • 5.2.1Peer rejection
      • 5.2.2Student groupings
    • 5.3Affective domain
      • 5.3.1Attitudes toward writing
      • 5.3.2Emotions related to learning to write and emotions experienced during writing
    • 5.4Academic domain
      • 5.4.1Writing processes
      • 5.4.2Writing traits
  • 6.Sociocognitive Model of Interventions for Writing Instruction
    • 6.1Socioaffective domain
    • 6.2Affective domain
    • 6.3Academic domain
      • 6.3.1Exemplary practices
      • 6.3.2Instructional organization
      • 6.3.3Targeted interventions
      • 6.3.4Formative assessment
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
Published online: 6 November 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.5.2.05bou
References (67)
References
Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle: Writing, reading and learning with adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
(2002). Social cognitive theory in cultural context. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51(2), 269–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Bergeron, L., Rousseau, N., & Leclerc, M. (2011). La pédagogie universelle: Au coeur de la planification de l’inclusion scolaire [Universal pedagogy: At the heart of planning for inclusive schooling.] Éducation et Francophonie [Education and Francophonie], 39(2), 87–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blain, S., & Painchaud, G. (1999). L’impact de la rétroaction verbale des pairs sur l’amélioration des compositions des élèves de 5e année en immersion française [The impact of peers’ verbal feedback on the improvement of Grade 5 FI students’ texts.] The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 56(1), 73–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourgoin, R., & Dicks, J. (2013). Reading without borders: At-risk students transitioning from L1 to L2 in French immersion. In K. Arnett & C. Mady (Eds.), Minority populations in Canadian second language education (pp. 118–134). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Braaksma, M. A. H., Rijlaarsdam, G., van den Bergh, H., & van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cognition and Instruction, 22(1), 1–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bournot-Trites, M. (2007). Qualité de l’écrit au niveau intermédiaire en immersion française: Effet d’un programme intensif et hypothèse d’un effet de plateau [Writing quality at the middle school level in French immersion: Effect of an intensive program and plateau effect hypothesis.] Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 7–24.Google Scholar
Bournot-Trites, M., & Séror, J. (2003). Students’ and teachers’ perceptions about strategies which promote proficiency in second language writing. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 129–157.Google Scholar
Canadian Parents for French. (nd). French immersion enrolment by province/territory and grade. Retrieved from [URL]
CAST. (2011). Universal Design for Learning guidelines Version 2.0. Wakefield, MA. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Cavanagh, M. (2006). Validation d’un programme d’intervention [Validating an intervention program.] Revue des Sciences de l’Éducation [Review of Educational Sciences], 32(1), 159–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CBC News. (March 28, 2008). Early French immersion program has created a two-tier system: Education minister. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Charmaz, K., & Mitchell, R. G. (2008). Grounded theory in ethnography. In P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.), Handbook of ethnography (pp. 160–174). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Day, E., & Shapson, S. (1991). Integrating formal and functional approaches to language teaching in French immersion: An experimental study. Language Learning, 411, 25–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum associates.Google Scholar
Erdos, C., Genesee, F., Savage, R. & Haigh, C. (2013). Predicting risk for oral and written language learning difficulties in students’ education in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 35(2), 371–398. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fagan, W. T., & Hayden, H. M. (1988). Writing processes in French and English of fifth grade French immersion students. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 44(4), 653–668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F. (2007). Immersion française et élèves à risques: Revue des données de recherche [French immersion and at-risk students: A review of research findings]. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 63(5), 655–688. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Genesee, F., & Fortune, T. (2014). Bilingual education and at-risk students. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2(2), 196–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall, K. (1993). Process writing in French immersion. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 49(2), 255–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography. Principles in practice (3rd ed.). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harklau, L. (2005). Ethnography and ethnographic research on second language teaching and learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 179–194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Harley, B. (1989). Functional grammar in French immersion: A classroom experiment. Applied linguistics, 101, 331–359. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harley, B., & King, M. L. (1989). Verb lexis in the written compositions of young L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 111, 415–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C. M. Levy & S. Randsdell (Eds.), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences and applications (pp. 1–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Hayes, J. R., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organisation of writing processes. In L. Gregg & E. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing (pp. 3–30). Hillsdale, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
McKay, S. L. (2006). Researching second language classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2007). Second language writing (4th ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kristmanson, P., & Dicks, J. (2014). Looking in the one-way mirror: Reflections on the changing face(s) of immersion in North America and beyond. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education, 2(2), 273–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kristmanson, P., Dicks, J., & Le Bouthillier, J. (2008). ÉCRI: A writing model incorporating best practices in French immersion. Proceedings of the International Association for the Scientific Knowledge-Teaching and Learning (IASK) . Aveiro, Portugal: IASK.
(2009). ÉCRI: A writing model incorporating best practices in French immersion at the middle school level. Reflexions, 28(1), 16–17.Google Scholar
(2010). Pedagogical applications of a second language writing model at the elementary and middle school levels. Equinox, 1(1), 37–62.Google Scholar
Lapkin, S., & Swain, M. (2000). Task outcomes: A focus on immersion students’ use of pronominal verbs in their writing. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique appliquée, 3(1–2), 7–12.Google Scholar
Lapkin, S., Swain, M., & Smith, M. (2002). Formulation and the learning of French pronominal verbs in a Canadian French immersion context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(4), 485–507. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le Bouthillier, J. (2013). The writing processes of a Grade 7 French immersion student with Asperger Syndrome. In K. Arnett & C. Mady (Eds.), Minority populations in second language education: Broadening the lens from Canada (pp. 135–150). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le Bouthillier, J., & Dicks, J. (2013). L’emploi d’un modèle d’enseignement systématique d’écriture: Une étude de cas en 7e année de l’immersion précoce [Systematic use of a writing instruction model: A case study in Grade 7 early French immersion]. The Canadian Modern Language Journal/Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 69(3), 298–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leki, I., Cumming, A. & Silva, T. (2008). A synthesis of research on second language writing in English. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lin, S.-J., Monroe, B., & Troia, G. (2007). Development of writing knowledge in Grades 2–8: A comparison of typically developing writers and their struggling peers. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 231, 207–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R. (1994). The effect of functional-analytic teaching on aspects of French immersion students’ sociolinguistic competence. Applied Linguistics, 15(2), 263–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 261, 399–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacKay, W. (2006). Connecting care and challenge: Tapping our human potential. Fredericton, N.-B.: AWM Legal Consulting.Google Scholar
Merriam, S. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
New Brunswick Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2013). Policy 322. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Pearson, D., & Gallagher, M. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 81, 317–344. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peregoy, S., & Boyle, O. (2005). Reading, writing and learning in ESL: A resource book for K–12 teachers. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Popham, W. J. (2008). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Porter, G., & AuCoin, A. (2012). Strengthening inclusion, strengthening schools. Report of the review of inclusive education programs and practices in New Brunswick schools. An action plan for growth. Fredericton: Province of New Brunswick. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Pritchard, R., & Honeycutt, R. (2007). Best practices in implementing a process approach to teaching writing. In S. Graham, C. A. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 28–49). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Prud’homme, L., Vienneau, R., Ramel, S., & Rousseau, N. (2011). La légimité de la diversité en éducation: Réflexions sur l’inclusion [The legacy of diversity in education: Reflections on inclusion]. Éducation et Francophonie [Education and Francophonie], 39(2), 6–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rehorick, S., Dicks, J., Kristmanson, P., & Cogswell, F. (2006). Quality learning in French second language in New Brunswick: A brief to the Department of Education. Retrieved from [URL]Google Scholar
Rivard, L. P. (1992). La production écrite en sciences: Étude préliminaire portant sur des élèves du Manitoba [Written production in sciences: A preliminary study on students from Manitoba]. Cahiers franco-canadiens de l’ouest, 4(1), 71–88.Google Scholar
(2001). Summary writing: A multi-grade study of French-immersion and Francophone secondary students. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 14(2), 171–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rivard, L., Dilk, S., & Barnabé, G. (2004). Le groupe verbal: Compétences grammaticales des élèves au secondaire en FL1 et FL2 au Manitoba [Verbal groups: Grammatical competence of high school students in FL1 and FL2 in Manitoba]. Cahiers Franco-canadiens de l’Ouest, 12(1–2), 139–173.Google Scholar
(2007). Étude comparative des compétences grammaticales d’élèves du secondaire en FL1 et en FL2 au Manitoba [Comparative study of the grammatical skills of secondary students in FL1 and FL2 in Manitoba]. The Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne des Langues Vivantes, 63(4), 487–516. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saddler, B., & Graham, S. (2007). The relationship between writing knowledge and writing performance among more and less skilled writers. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23(3), 231–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scraba, E. (2002). A review of the New Brunswick education system anglophone sector. Edmonton, Alberta: Education Consulting International.Google Scholar
Shapiro, E. (nd). Tiered instruction and intervention in a Response-to-Intervention model. Bethlehem, PA: RTI Action Network. Retrieved from [URL]
Swain, M., & Lapkin, S. (1998). Interaction and second language learning: Two adolescent French immersion students working together. The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 320–337. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Focus on form through collaborative dialogue: Exploring task effects. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second-language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 99–118). London: Longman.Google Scholar
(2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ responses to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 371, 285–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trehearne, M. (2006). Littératie de la 3e à la 6e année [Literacy Grades 3–6.] Toronto: Thomson Nelson.Google Scholar
Watson-Gegeo, K. A. (1988). Ethnography in ESL: Defining the essentials. TESOL Quarterly, 22(4), 575–592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yin, R. (2009). Case study research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Zollers, N., Ramanathan, A., & Moonset, Y. (1999). The relationship between school culture and inclusion: How an inclusive culture supports inclusive education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 12(2), 157–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar