Skip to main content

Writing and Learning to Write: A Double Challenge

  • Chapter
New Learning

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allal, L. (1999). Metacognitive regulation of writing in the classroom. In: O. Rijlaarsdam, & E. Espéret (Series Editors) & A. Camps & M. Milian (Vol. Eds.). Studies in Writing: Vol. 6 Metalinguistic Activity in Learning to Write. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson J.R. (1990). Cognitive psychology and its implications. (3rd ed.) New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J.R. (1983). The architecture of cognition. Cognitive Science Series, 5. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J.R. (1987). Skill acquisition. Compilation of weak-method problem solutions. Psychological Review, 94, 192–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bialystok, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second language learning. Language learning, 28, 69–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breen, M. (1987 a). Contemporary paradigms in syllabus design. Part 1. Language Teaching (April).

    Google Scholar 

  • Breen, M. (1987 b). Contemporary paradigms in syllabus design. Part 2. Language Teaching, (July).

    Google Scholar 

  • Breetvelt, I., van den Bergh, H., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1994). Relations between Writing Processes and Text Quality: When and How? Cognition and Instruction, 12,(2), 103–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camps, A. & Milian, M. (1999). Introduction. This volume.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camps, A., & M. Milian (1999). Introduction. In: G. Rijlaarsdam, & E. Espéret (Series Editors) & A. Camps & M. Milian (Vol. Eds.). Studies in Writing: Vol. 6 Metalinguistic Activity in Learning to Write. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrell, P. (1984). Evidence of a formal schema in second language comprehension. Language learning, 34(2), 87–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couzijn, M. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). Learning to read and write argumentative text by observation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G., Bergh, H. van den & Couzijn, M. (eds.) (1996). Effective teaching and learning of writing. Current trends in research. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Pp. 253–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couzijn, M. (1995). Observation of writing and reading activities. Effect on learning and transfer. Thesis University of Amsterdam. Dordrecht: Dorfix.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couzijn, M. (1999). Learning to write by observation of writing and reading processes; Effects on learning and transfer. Learning and Instruction. [Special issue The Learning and Instruction of Writing ed. by D. Galbraith & G. Rijlaarsdam]. Pp. 109–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijk, T. van & W. Kintsch (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elbow, P. (1973), Writing without teachers. Oxford University Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Espéret, E. (1999). Commentary. Teaching and learning to write: cognitive and social processes at work. Learning and Instruction, 9(2), 229–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L.S. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: a social-cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grice, H.P. (1981). Logica en gesprek [Logic and conversation]. In F.H. van Eemeren & W.K.B. Koning (Eds.), Studies over taalhandelingen. Meppel: Boom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groot, A D. de (1978). Wat neemt een leerling mee van onderwijs? Gedragsrepertoires, programma’s kennis-en-vaardigheden. [What profits do students take from education? Behavior, programmes, knowledge-and-skills]. In: Handboek voor de Onderwijspraktijk, 2, (januari), A.1–A.23. Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Groot, A.D. de (1980). Over leerervaringen en leerdoelen. [On learning effects and learning goals]. In: Handboek voor de Onderwijspraktijk [Handbook for Educational Practice], 10, (November), B.1–B.18. Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J.R. & L.S Flower (1980). Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.). Cognitive processes in writing (3–30). Hillsdale N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on Written Composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, Ill.: NCRE/ERIC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, T. & G. Rijlaarsdam (1992) Het learner report in de praktijk van de bovenbouw. W. De Moor, & M. van Woerkom (red.) Literaire competentie. Het doel van literatuuronderwijs [Literary competence: The goal of literature education.]. Den Haag: NBLC p. 197–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, T. & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). Students as self-assessors: learning experiences of literature teaching in secondary schools. E. Marum (Ed.). Children and books in the modern world: Contemporary perspectives on literacy. (98–115). London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, T. (1998). Literatuur bij benadering. Een empirisch onderzoek naar de vormgeving en opbrengsten van het literatuuronderwijs Nederlands in de bovenbouw van het havo en vwo. [Approaches to literature teaching. An empirical study of the form and results of Dutch literature teaching in higher general secondary and pre-university education]. Thesis, University of Amsterdam. Amsterdam: Thesis Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, T.M., G.C.W. Rijlaarsdam (1990). What pupils learn from literature teaching in the Netherlands. In: M. Hayhoe, S. Parker, Reading and Response. (94–106). Milton-Keynes-Philadelphia: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreeft, H., & G. Rijlaarsdam (1980). Zelfevaluatie in het moedertaalonderwijs. [Self-evaluation in mothertongue education.] Levende Talen, 352, 397–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London and New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levelt, W. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumbelli, L., G. Paoletti, Ch. Camagni & T. Frauzin (1996). Can the ability to monitor local coherence in text comprehension be transferred to writing? In: G. Rijlaarsdam, H. v.d. Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.) Effective teaching and learning of writing. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second language learning. London/New York: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milian-Gubern, M. (1996). Contextual factors enhancing cognitive and metacognitive activity during the process of collaborative writing. In: G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.) (1996). Effective Teaching and Learning of Writing. (372–378). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oostdam, R., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1995). Towards Strategic Language Education. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar, A. S. & Brown, A.L. (1989). Instruction for self-regulated learning. In L.B. Resnick & L.E. Knopfler (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research. (pp. 19–39). Alexandria: Association for supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pool, E. Van der, & Wijk, C. Van (1995) Proces en strategie in een psycholinguistisch model van schrijven en lezen [Process and strategy in a psycholinguistic model of writing and reading]. Tijdschrift voor Onderwijsresearch, 20, 200–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribas, T., Farrera, N., & Camps, A. (1997). Metalinguistic activity in groups writing situations: the influence of didactic situations and group characteristics. Rodríguez Illera, J. L. & L. Tolchinsky (1997). Proceedings 1996 European Writing Conferences EARLI Special Interest Group-Writing & Writing and Computers Association. Barcelona October 23–25 1996. CD-ROM. Barcelona: ICE University of Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. & Janssen, T. (1996). How do we evaluate the literature curriculum? About a social frame of reference. In E. Marum (ed.)., Children and books in the modern world. Contemporary perspectives on literacy. (75–98). London/Washington D.C.: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. & M. Couzijn (1999). Stimulating awareness of learning in the writing curriculum. In: Camps, A. & M. Milian (Eds.). Metalinguistic Activity in Learning to Write. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. & Van den Bergh, H (1996). An agenda for Research into an interactive Compensatory Model of Writing. Many Questions, Some Answers. C. Michael Levy and Sarah Ransdell. The Science of Writing (107–126). New York (N.J.): Lawrence Erlbaum Ass..

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. (1987). Effects of peer evaluation on writing performance, writing processes and psychological measures. Convention on College Composition and Communication. Atlanta (April).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. (1989). Learning, whose learning? Autonomous learning in mother tongue education. Paper International Convention on Language and Education. March (22nd–26th) 1993. Norwich U.K. Abstract (English, whose English? International Convention on Language in Education).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. (1994). Measuring Writing: Processes and Text Quality. Tasks and Essay Scales. Graduate School of Teaching and Learning: Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rijlaarsdam, G. (forthcoming). Learning from Peer feedback in writing. An empirical study. In S. Brindley & H. Van den Bergh (Eds.). The learning and teaching of skills in language arts. Rijlaarsdam, G. (Series editor). Research in the learning and teaching of language and literature. Volume II. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouiller, Y. & Allal, L. (1997). Peer interaction in narrative text revision. Rodríguez Illera, J. L. & L. Tolchinsky (1997). Proceedings 1996 European Writing Conferences EARLI Special Interest Group-Writing & Writing and Computers Association. Barcelona October 23–25 1996. CD-ROM. Barcelona: ICE University of Barcelona.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouiller, Y. (1996). Metacognitive regulations, peer interactions and revisions of narratives by sixth graders. In: Rijlaarsdam, G., H. van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.) (1996). Effective Teaching and Learning of Writing (273–287). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saada-Robert, M. (1999). Effective means for learning to manage cognitive load in 2nd grade school writing: a case study. Learning and Instruction. [Special issue The Learning and Instruction of Writing ed. by Galbraith, D. & G. Rijlaarsdam]. 189–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarbin, T.R. & V.L. Allan (1968). Role Theory. In: G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.). Handbook of Social Psychology. Vol. 1. (488–567). Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarbin, T.R. (1976). Cross-Age Tutoring and social Identity. In: V. L. Allan (Ed.) Children as Teachers. Theory and Research. (27–40). New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoonen, R., & De Glopper, K. (1996). Writing performance and knowledge about writing. In: G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds.). Theories, Models and Methodology in Writing Research (87–108). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.), (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H., & Zimmerman. B.J. (Eds.). (1998). Self-regulated learning, from teaching to self-reflective practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J.R (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selinker, L. (1971). The psychologically relevant data of second language learning. In Pimsleur, P. & Quinn, T. (Ed.), The psychology of second language learning Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, P.R.J. (1991, May). Constructive learning: The role of the learner. Paper presented at the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on the Design of Constructivist Learning Environments, Louvain, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, H.H. (1990). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rijlaarsdam, G., Couzijn, M. (2000). Writing and Learning to Write: A Double Challenge. In: Simons, RJ., van der Linden, J., Duffy, T. (eds) New Learning. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47614-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47614-2_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-6296-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47614-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics