The State of the Art of Writing:

The Neglected ‘R’—Then and Now

Matt Copeland, KSDE Writing ConsultantKansas State Department of Education

785-296-5060mcopeland@ksde.org

The Neglected ‘R’—Then Langer and Applebee (1978)

In How Writing Shapes Thinking,

Judith Langer and Arthur Applebee

(1978) came to some sobering

conclusions about students’ writing

ability:

The Neglected ‘R’—Then Langer and Applebee (1978)

• Students’ writing is often superficial,

and “even the ‘better’ responses show

little evidence of well-developed

problem-solving strategies or critical

thinking skills.”

(p. 4)

The Neglected ‘R’—Then Langer and Applebee (1978)

• A major conclusion to draw from the assessment of students’ writing at all grade levels is that students “are deficient in higher order thinking skills.” They have difficulty performing adequately on analytic writing tasks, as well as on persuasive writing tasks.

(p. 4)

The Neglected ‘R’—Then Langer and Applebee (1978)

• “Because writing and thinking are so deeply intertwined, appropriate writing assignments provide an ideal way to increase student experiences with such type of thinking.” As a result, “Students need broad-based experiences in which reading and writing tasks are integrated with their work throughout the curriculum.”

(p. 4)

The Neglected ‘R’—Then Langer and Applebee (1978)

• “Simply put, in the whole range of

academic course work, American

children do not write frequently enough,

and the reading and writing tasks they

are given do not require them to think

deeply enough.” (p. 4)

As Langer and Applebee were sounding the alarm that students in American schools were not writing enough, a mountain of research was emerging that clearly outlined the benefits received by those students who were fortunate enough to find themselves in rigorous writing programs.

The Neglected ‘R’—ThenBenefits of Rigorous Writing Programs

• The best incoming college freshmen

writers are those who do the most writing

in high school (McQueen, Murray, and

Evens 1963).

The Neglected ‘R’—ThenBenefits of Rigorous Writing Programs

• The best college freshmen writers are

those students who do more expository

writing in high school (Bamberg 1978).

The Neglected ‘R’—ThenBenefits of Rigorous Writing Programs

• Students who write two essays a week

do better in college than those who

write one (Lokke and Wykoff 1948).

The Neglected ‘R’—ThenBenefits of Rigorous Writing Programs

• Good writers are much more likely to do

more writing outside of school (Stallard

1974 and Donaldson 1967, in separate

studies).

The Neglected ‘R’—ThenBenefits of Rigorous Writing Programs

• A higher percentage of college freshmen

who entered as poor writers are those

students who did no writing in high school

(Woodward and Phillips 1967).

As a result of Langer and Applebee’s

finding and others that echoed their

concerns, you might think that much

of the educational reform over the

past two decades has focused on

bringing writing to the forefront in

our schools.

Unfortunately, the evidence suggests

that very little has changed.

Today, nearly two decades after

Langer and Applebee revealed that

our students simply were not writing

enough, the writing front in

America’s schools remains bleak.

In one recent study in grades one, three, and five, only 15 percent of the school day was spent in any kind of writing activity.

Two-thirds of the writing that did occur was word-for-word copying in workbooks.

(National Writing Project

2003, p.6)

The Neglected ‘R’—NowChildren today still receive little opportunity to

write

Ninety-seven percent of elementary students write less than three hours a week.

This is 15 percent of the total time they spend watching television.

(National Commission of Writing 2003, p.23)

The Neglected ‘R’—NowChildren today still receive little opportunity to

write

The Neglected ‘R’—NowChildren today still receive little opportunity to

write

Compositions of a paragraph or more in length are infrequent even at the high school level.

(National Writing Project and Carl Nagin 2003, p.6)

The Neglected ‘R’—NowChildren today still receive little opportunity to

write

Forty percent of twelfth graders report that they are “never” or “hardly ever” assigned a paper of three pages or more in length.

(National Commission on Writing 2003, p. 23)

Two decades after the research made

a compelling call for us to carve out

more writing time for our students,

the National Commission on Writing

(2003) declared in its report to the

United States Congress that writing

remains the “neglected ‘R’” in our

schools.

The National Commission on Writing believes we must improve the quality of our students’ writing if they are to succeed in college and in life.

The Neglected ‘R’National Commission on Writing’s

Recommendations

1. Every state should revisit its

educational standards to make

sure they include a comprehensive

writing policy.

The Neglected ‘R’National Commission on Writing’s

Recommendations

2. More out-of-school time should be

used to encourage writing.

The Neglected ‘R’National Commission on Writing’s

Recommendations

3. School districts should insist that

writing be taught in all subjects

and at all grade levels.

The Neglected ‘R’National Commission on Writing’s

Recommendations

4. Every district should require each

teacher to successfully complete a

course in writing theory and

practice as a condition for teacher

licensing.

The Neglected ‘R’National Commission on Writing’s

Recommendations

5. Schools should aim to double the

amount of time most students

spend writing.

Then, in 2004, and against a backdrop of increased levels of accountability in the areas of math and reading because of No Child Left Behind, the National Commission on Writing began meeting with groups of teachers, listening to experts in the field share their thoughts on the state of student writing and the best practices to teach writing.

In May of 2006, the National Commission on Writing summarized the seven clear messages of those meetings.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

1. Many excellent examples of

effective practice in writing

instruction do exist.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

2. The standardization and scripting

of instruction threaten to

undermine this writing instruction.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

3. A climate to encourage writing

must be created in the classroom

and in the school.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

4. Genuine reform requires

personalization of instruction.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

5. Maintaining a sense of

“community” in schools is essential

to writing.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

6. Integrating writing into the reform

agenda, while challenging, is

integral to the success of both.

Seven Messages from Teachers in the Field

to the National Commission on Writing

7. The best hope for improving both

writing and schools generally lies

in high-quality professional

development.

Writing also appears to be among

the priorities on the radar screens of

many Americans from very different

walks of life.

The 2007 Survey on Teaching

Writing, a national public opinion

survey conducted for the National

Writing Project by the research firm

Belden, Russonello and Stewart,

reported the following results:

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

A broad majority of Americans believes

good writing skills are very important

(74% say “greater need to write well to

succeed than 20 years ago”).

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

More then four-fifths (84%) of American

say students should learn to write well as

a requirement for high-school graduation.

This puts writing below reading (94%)

and math (94%) and ahead of American

history (73%), algebra (56%), biology

(48%) and foreign language (31%).

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

Both blue-collar workers (80%) and white-

collar workers (93%) say writing is

important to success in their particular

careers.

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

Americans say students need writing

skills to succeed in college (67%

“essential”), expressing a stronger belief

that writing is essential for success in

college than it is for any occupation.

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

Learning to read and write go hand in hand, according to a large majority of the public (79%) – rejecting the view that reading skills need to come first.

Further, learning to write well is perceived as a key ingredient for students to acquire other skills such as effective communication (66% “essential”), grammar (63%) and critical thinking (52%).

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

By a margin of two to one (66% vs. 31%),

the public sees more benefit in helping

teachers teach writing, than putting those

resources into testing students to see how

well they are learning to write.

The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing

Americans want to see teacher-training

programs include courses on teaching

writing (79% “good idea”) and

professional development for current

teachers (75% “good idea”).

In 2003, the National Commission on

Writing suggested “American

education will never realize its

potential as an engine of opportunity

and economic growth until a writing

revolution puts the power of

language and communication in

their proper place in the classroom”

( p. 14).

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Does my school have a

comprehensive, across-the-

curriculum writing approach?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Considering all of my students’

classes, are they writing enough in

school?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Are my students writing enough out of school?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Is writing taught at my school in all

classes at all grade levels?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Have the teachers at my site, in all

grade levels and subjects, been

given extensive writing training?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Have the administrators of my

school and my district

demonstrated their devotion to

high-quality professional

development for all teachers in the

area of writing?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Do teachers at my site have

opportunities to discuss with one

another student writing and the

strengths and weaknesses we see in

that student writing?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Am I creating an environment that

supports both students and their

writing?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Is writing instruction in my

classroom personalized and based

on the writing needs of individual

students?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Are students’ writing skills being

built from their reading and studying

of effective model texts in my

classroom?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Am I providing choice for my

students in their writing while still

maintaining high expectations and

rigorous standards?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

• Are my students receiving

instruction in writing for real-life

purposes and audiences and are

they writing for a variety of

contexts?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

If not you? Who?

Questions for the ‘Writing Revolution’

If not now? When?

BibliographyBamberg, B. 1978. “Composition Instruction Does Make a

Difference: A Comparison of the High School Preparation of College Freshmen in Regular and Remedial English Classes.” Research in the Teaching of English 12: 47-59.

Donaldson, K. 1967. “Variables Distinguishing Between Effective and Ineffective Writers in the Tenth Grade.” Journal of Experimental Education 4: 37-41.

Gallagher, K. 2006. Teaching Adolescent Writers. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Available online at http://www.stenhouse.com/productcart/pc/viewPrd.asp?idProduct=9032.

Krashen, S. 1984. Writing: Research, Theory and Applications. New York: Pergamon Institute of English.

BibliographyLanger, J. A., and A. N. Applebee. 1978. How Writing Shapes

Thinking: A Study of Teaching and Learning. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

Lokke, V., and G. Wykoff. 1948. “‘Double Writing’ in Freshman Composition—an Experiment.” School and Society 68: 437-439.

McQueen, R., A. K. Murray, and F. Evans. 1963. “Relationships Between Writing Required in High School and English Proficiency in College.” Journal of Experimental Education 31: 419-423.

National Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools, and Colleges. 2003. The Neglected “R”: The Need for a Writing Revolution. New York: The College Board. Available online at http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/neglectedr.pdf.

BibliographyNational Commission on Writing for America’s Families, Schools,

and Colleges. 2006. Writing and School Reform. New York: The College Board. Available online at http://www.writingcommission.org/prod_downloads/writingcom/writing-school-reform-natl-comm-writing.pdf.

National Writing Project. 2007. The 2007 Survey on Teaching Writing: American Public Opinion on the Importance of Writing in Schools. Washington DC: Belden, Russonello, & Stewart Research and Communications. Available online at http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/download/nwp_file/8856/NWP_2007_Survey_Report.pdf?x-r=pcfile_d.

National Writing Project and Carl Nagin. 2003. Because Writing Matters. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Stallard, C. 1974. “An Analysis of the Writing Behaviour of Good Student Writers.” Research in the Teaching of English 8: 206-218.

Woodward, J., and A. Phillips. 1967. “Profile of the Poor Writer.” Research in the Teaching of English 1: 41-53.