Teaching it "Write": Teacher Perspectives on Writing Instruction Within English and French Immersion Classrooms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Writing today is a means of communication: a medium through which we learn, share and self-express (Graham, 2006).In the classroom, writing is used to acquire, remember, and share knowledge; writing aids in the process of discovering, shaping and refining ideas about a topic (Durst & Newell, 1989).Although writing instruction is a fundamental component of both Academic English and French Immersion language courses at the Grade 9 level (Ontario Ministry of Education, 1999Education, , 2007)), concern remains that many adolescents do not develop the skills necessary in writing to be successful in academic, workplace or personal life domains (Graham & Perin, 2007).Yet, little research has been conducted to determine what teachers are doing instructionally at the high school level.This study investigated the described individual pedagogies of teachers regarding writing instruction within two Grade 9 language contexts: English and French Immersion.I interviewed seven teachers, one-on-one, about their approach to writing instruction and the function of writing within their classroom, either in person or over the phone.A corresponding document of teaching materials referenced by teachers during the interviews was conducted.The data were thematically analyzed individually, by participant, and then subsequently analyzed within and between language contexts.The data analysis yielded four recurring themes: (1) Perceived Individual Experiences and Beliefs Informing Practice, (2) Role of Curriculum, (3) Individual Teaching Practice, and (4) Assessment.The findings from this study suggest that teachers, based on their beliefs and experience, make informed pedagogical decisions within their classrooms to meet the needs of their students.Writing is used in a variety of forms, and is utilized as a vehicle for assessment of other strand requirements.These past two years have been an unpredictable journey.I feel very fortunate to have had the incredible support and coaching that I did, to help me navigate throughout this process.I would like to first thank my participants who volunteered their time to help me in my research.Without them this thesis would never have been possible.Dr. Elizabeth Lee, you have been a tremendous
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".