Skip to main content

Children’s Communication Skills: Implications for the Development of Writing Strategies

  • Chapter
Cognitive Strategy Research

Abstract

Several recent national studies have shown that students in the United States perform at a remarkably low level on writing tasks (Boyer, 1983; National Assessment of Educational Progress, 1986; National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). The 1986 NAEP “Writing Report Card” surveyed the writing skills of 55,000 students from 4th to 11th grade across the country. Children in this project completed assignments that assessed their informative, persuasive, and imaginative writing skills. After reviewing the children’s work, the authors’ conclusion was that “most students… are unable to write adequately except in response to the simplest of tasks…. Performance in writing in our schools is, quite simply, bad” (NAEP, 1986, pp. 3, 9). There are clearly many factors that contribute to this situation. However; one important factor is that when children first begin to learn to write, their understanding of the requirements of the writing task is limited, and they lack many of the comprehension and memory strategies that expert writers use to cope with the cognitive demands of the writing task.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

  • Anderson, V.A., Bereiter, C., & Smart, D. (1980). Activation of semantic networks in writing: Teaching students how to do it themselves. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, P., E. Beal, C.R., & Corson, J. (1988). Talking on paper: Dialogue as a writing task for sixth graders. Unpublished manuscript, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Applebee, A.N. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 577–596.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, E.J. (1982). Learning to revise: Some component processes. In M. Nystrand (Ed.), What writers know: The language, process, and structure of written discourse 345–363. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beach, J.D. (1983). Teaching students to write informational reports. Elementary School Journal, 84, 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R. (1987). Repairing the message: Children’s monitoring and revision skills. Child Development, 58, 401–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R. (April 1988). The development of text evaluation and revision skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R., Bonitatibus, G., & Garrod, A. (1988). The effect of training in comprehension monitoring on children’s ability to evaluate and revise problematic texts. Unpub-lished manuscript, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R., & Flavell, J.H. (1982). Young speakers’ evaluations of their listener’s comprehension in a referential communication task. Child Development, 54, 148–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R., & Flavell, J.H. (1984). Development of the ability to distinguish communicative intention and literal message meaning. Child Development, 55, 920–928.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beal, C.R., & Griffin, E.A. (March 1987). Learning to use a text editor. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. (1978). Discourse type, schema and strategy — A view from the standpoint of instructional design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1982). From conversation to composition: The role of instruction in a developmental process. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, Vol. 2, pp. 1–64. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1986). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonitatibus, G.J. (1988). Comprehension monitoring and the apprehension of literal meaning. Child Development, 59, 60–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonitatibus, G.J., & Flavell, J.H. (1985). Effect of presenting a message in written form on young children’s ability to evaluate its communication adequacy. Developmental Psychology, 21, 455–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos, C.S. (1988). Process-oriented writing: Instructional implications for mildly handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 54, 521–527.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E.L. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bracewell, R.J., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1978). The development of audience awareness in writing. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 154–443)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bridwell, L.S. (1980). Revising strategies in twelfth grade students’ transactional writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 197–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L., Day, J.D., & Jones, R.S. (1983). The development of plans for summarizing texts. Child Development, 54, 968–979.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L., & Smiley, S.S. (1977). Rating the importance of structural units of prose passages: A problem of metacognitive development. Child Development, 48, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A.L., & Smiley, S.S. (1978). The development of strategies for studying texts. Child Development, 49, 1076–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, B.C., Collins, A., Rubin, A.D., & Gentner, D. (1982). Three perspectives on writing. Educational Psychologist, 17, 131–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calkins, L.M. (1980). Children’s rewriting strategies. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 331–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capelli, C.A. (April 1985). Improving comprehension monitoring through training in hypothesis testing. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cioffi, G. (1984). Observing composing behaviors of primary-age children: The interaction of oral and written language. In R. Beach & L.S. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition research pp. 171–190. New York: Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M., & Riel, M. (1986). Computer networks: Creating real audiences for students’ writing (Report No. 15). San Diego: University of California, Interactive Technology Laboratory, Center for Human Information Processing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., & Gentner, D. (1980). A framework for a cognitive theory of writing. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing pp. 51–72. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coop, R.H., White, K., Tapscott, B., & Lee, L. (1983). A program to develop basic writing skills in grades 4–9. Elementary School Journal, 84, 76–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowhurst, M. (March 1987). The effect of reading instruction and writing instruction on reading and writing persuasion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daiute, C. (1985). Writing and computers. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, W.P. (1981). Children’s oral communication skills. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diederich, P.B. (1984). Measuring growth in writing. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmunds, G.A., Cameron, C.A., & Eglington, K. (April 1988). Audience adaptation in persuasive letters of elementary school children. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Englert, C.S., & Raphael, T.E. (1988). Constructing well-formed prose: Process, structure and metacognitive knowledge. Exceptional Children, 54, 513–520.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Faigley, L., & Witte, S.P. (1981). Analyzing revision. College Composition and Communication, 32, 400–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faigley, L., & Witte, S.F. (1984). Measuring the effects of revisions on text structure. In R. Beach & L.S. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition research pp. 95–108. New York: Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J., & Markham, L.R. (1987). Teaching children about revision in writing. Cognition and Instruction, 4, 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, J., & Teasley, A. (1985). Effects of instruction in narrative structure on children’s writing. Unpublished manuscript, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J.H., Botkin, P.T., Fry, C.L., Wright, J.W., & Jarvis, P.E. (1968). The development of role-taking and communication skills in children. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flavell, J.H., Speer, J.R., Green, F.L., & August, D.L. (1981). The development of comprehension monitoring and knowledge about communication. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46, (5, Serial No. 192).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L.S., & Hayes, J.R. (1980). The dynamics of composing: Making plans and juggling constraints. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing pp. 31–50. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flower, L.S., & Hayes, J.R. (1981). Plans that guide the composing process. In C.H. Frederiksen & J.F. Dominic (Eds.), Writing: The nature, development and teaching of written communication pp. 39–58. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerlach, G.J. (March 1987). The effect of typing skill on using a word processor for composition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, J.D. (1980). Experiments on composing letters: Some facts, some myths and some observations. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.), Cognitive processes in writing pp. 97–127. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum & Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. (April 1986). Improving learning disabled students’ compositions via story grammar training: A component analysis of self-control strategy training. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., & Harris, K. (April 1988). Improving learning disabled students’ skills at generating essays: Self-instructional strategy training. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., Harris, K.R., & Sawyer, R. (1987). Composition instruction with learning disabled students: Self instructional strategy training. Focus on Exceptional Children, 20, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves, A. (1983). Sharing as a motivation for writing. Elementary School Journal, 84, 33–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves, D.H. (1983). Writing: Teachers and children at work. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Heap, J.L. (April 1986). Collabrative practices during computer writing in a first grade classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hidi, S., & Hildyard, A. (1983). The comparison of oral and written productions of two discourse types. Discourse Processes, 6, 91–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillocks, G. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: ERIC clearinghouse on reading and communication skills.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humes, A. (1983). Putting writing research into practice. Elementary School Journal, 84, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kroll, B.M. (1978). Cognitive egocentrism and the problem of audience awareness in written discourse. Research in the Teaching of English, 12, 269–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroll, B.M. (1984). Audience adaptation in children’s written persuasive letters. Written Communication, 1, 407–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurth, R.J., & Kurth, L.M. (March 1987). A comparison of writing instruction using word processing, word processing with voice synthesis, and no word processing in kindergarten and first grade. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, R., & Comeaux, M. (March 1987). A developmental study of the effects of goal constraints on composition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J.A., Boruta, M.J., & Vasconcellos, M.T. (1983). Microcomputer-based environments for writing: A Writer’s assistant, In A.C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Classroom computers and cognitive science pp. 219–232. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, E.M. (1977). Realizing that you don’t understand: A preliminary investigation. Child Development, 48, 986–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markman, E.M. (1979). Realizing that you don’t understand: Elementary school children’s awareness of inconsistencies. Child Development, 50, 643–655.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Markman, E.M., & Gorin, L. (1981). Children’s ability to adjust their standards for evaluating comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 320–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCutchen, D., & Perfetti, C.A. (1983). Local coherence: Helping young writers manage a complex task. Elementary School Journal, 84, 71–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G.E. (1985). The effects of general and specific self-instruction training on children’s comprehension monitoring performances during reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 616–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G.E., Giovenco, A., & Rentiers, K.A. (1987). Fostering comprehension monitoring in below-average readers through self-instruction training. Journal of Reading Behavior, 19, 379–393.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Assessment of Educational Progress. (1986). The writing report card: Writing achievement in American schools. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nystrand, M. (1986). The structure of written communication: Studies in reciprocity between writers and readers. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Looney, J., & Rubin, D. (April 1986). Procedural facilitation of audience awareness in the revision processes of basic writers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D.R. (1977). From utterance to text: The bias of language in speech and writing. Harvard Educational Review, 47, 257–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D.R., & Hildyard, A. (1983). Writing and literal meaning. In M. Martlew (Ed.), Psychology of written language: A developmental and educational perspective pp. 41–65. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pekala, R. (1983). By popular demand. Elementary School Journal, 84, 25–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perl, S. (1979). The composing process of unskilled college writers. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 317–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perl, S. (1983). How teachers teach the writing process. Elementary School Journal, 84, 19–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, C.L., Danner FW, & Flavell, J.H. (1972). Developmental changes in children’s responses to three indications of communicative failure. Child Development, 43, 1463–1468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, E.F., Busching, B.A., McCormick, C.B., Wilkes, V., & Slesinger, B.A. (March 1987). Criteria children use to evaluate their own and others’ writing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prentice, W.C. (1980). The effects of intended audience and feedback on the writings of middle grade pupils. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 943A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riel, M.M. (April 1986). The educational potential of computer networking. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, E. (1981). The child’s understanding of inadequate messages and communication failure: A problem of ignorance or egocentrism: In W.P. Dickson (Ed.), Children’s oral communication skills pp. 167–188. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, E., Goelman, H., & Olson, D.R. (1983). Children’s understanding of the relation between expressions (what was said) and intentions (what was meant). British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 1, 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, A. (1983). The computer confronts language arts: Cans and shoulds for education. In A.C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Classroom computers and cognitive science pp. 201–217. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.L. (1982). Adapting syntax in writing to varying audiences as a function of age and social cognitive ability. Journal of Child Language, 9, 497–510.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D.L., Piche, G.L., Michlin, M.L., & Johnson, F.L. (1984). Social cognitive ability as a predictor of the quality of fourth-graders’ written narratives. In R. Beach & L.S. Bridwell (Eds.), New directions in composition research pp. 297–307. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sager, C. (1973). Improving the quality of written composition through pupil use of rating scale. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34, 1496A.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M. (August 1986). Designs for fostering expertise. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Amherst, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (April 1979). The effects of writing rate on children’s composition. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Woodruff, E. (1980). The effects of content knowledge on writing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, R.A., Pettigrew, J., & van Nostrand, A.D. (1983). Tactical planning of writing instruction. Elementary School Journal, 84, 45–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1973). The structure of ill-structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4, 181–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speer, J.R. (1984). Two practical strategies young children use to interpret vague instructions. Child Development, 55, 1811–1819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, N. (1986). Knowledge and process in the acquisition of writing skills. In E.Z. Rothkopf (Ed.), Review of research in education, Vol. 13. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetroe, J. (1984). Information processing demand of plot construction in story writing. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tompkins, G.E., & Friend, M. (1988). After your students write: What’s next? Teaching Exceptional Children, 20, 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, E. (1985). Can word processing help the writing process? Learning: The magazine for creative teaching, 13, 54–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehurst, G.L., & Sonnenschein, S. (1978). The development of communication: Attribute variation leads to contrast failure. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 25, 454–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitehurst, G.L., & Sonnenschein, S. (1985). The development of communication: A functional analysis. Annals of Child Development, 2, 1–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehurst, G.L., Sonnenschein, S., & Ianfolla, B.J. (1981). Learning to communicate from models: Children confuse length with information. Child Development, 52, 507–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitt, J., Paul, P.V., & Reynolds, C.J. (1988). Motivate reluctant learning disabled writers. Teaching Exceptional Children, 20, 37–39.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1989 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Beal, C.R. (1989). Children’s Communication Skills: Implications for the Development of Writing Strategies. In: McCormick, C.B., Miller, G.E., Pressley, M. (eds) Cognitive Strategy Research. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8838-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8838-8_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-8840-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-8838-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics