INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce this document, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “ Missing Page(s)” . I f it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along w ith adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark, it is an indication of either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, duplicate copy, or copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed. For blurred pages, a good image o f the page can be found in the adjacent frame. I f copyrighted materials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photographed, a definite method of “sectioning” the material has been followed. It is customary to begin film ing at the upper le ft hand comer o f a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again-beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For illustrations that cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted into your xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases the best available copy has been filmed. University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 8519047 Woodson, Nancy Potter ORAL AND TEXTUAL COMPOSING PATTERNS OF BEGINNING WRITERS The Ohio State University Ph.D. 1985 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 Copyright 1985 by Woodson, Nancy Potter All Rights Reserved ORAL AND TEXTUAL COMPOSING PATTERNS OF BEGINNING WRITERS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Nancy Potter Woodson, B.A., M.Ed. ******* The Ohio State University 1985 Reading Committee Approved By Dr. Donald Bateman Dr. Frank O ’Hare Dr. David Frantz Dr. Donald Bateman Department of Educational Theory and Practice Copyright by Nancy Potter Woodson 1985 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My acknowledgments are gratefully offered to the many friends who supported me during my studies and the writing of this dissertation. There are three persons who should be singled out, however, since they were most instrumental in guiding and sustaining me throughout. My husband, Thomas Woodson, encouraged and supported me In count­ less ways. His helpful suggestions and criticisms of this dissertation allowed me to believe from the outset that it could be completed. His caring and patience made my work possible and inspired confidence. My late father, Frederick Potter, whose final thoughts were for my studies rather than himself, will be a constant reminder of love and courage. His example of personal dignity allowed me the determination to continue my work. Professor Donald Bateman, my advisor, reminded me many times of what it means to be a truly fine teacher: to create space for the in­ dividual's idea to grow; to contribute help when it is needed; and, finally, to share graciously in the delight of the accomplished task. During my years as his student, Professor Bateman showed concern and kindness on every occasion. No project is ever completed in isolation. My sources of support were constant and generously given; this dissertation would not have been possible without them. ii VITA January 27, 1935 ................... Born-North Adams, Massachusetts 1957 ................................ B.A., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1962 ................................ M.Ed., North Adams State College, North Adams, Massachusetts 1965-1968 .......................... Lecturer, English Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1971-1974 .......................... Lecturer/Instruetor, Division of Comparative Studies, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1974-1977 .......................... Teacher/Administrator, Upper Arlington School System, Upper Arlington, Ohio 1977-1985 ........... ........... Lecturer/Instruetor, The Writing Workshop, English Department, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio PUBLICATIONS "The Importance of Re-Reading Writing." English Language Arts Bulletin. Fall/Winter 1982, Volume 23. "Teaching Functional Writing at the High School Level." Abstract: Central Ohio Chapter Society for Technical Communications, Battelle Memorial Institute, 1975. ill FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: English Education Studies in Composition. Professor Susan Helgeson Studies in Psycholinguistics. Professor Donald Bateman iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................. ii VITA ................................................................. ill LIST OF T A B L E S .................................................... vi PREFACE ........................................... ............... ' vii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ............................................. 1 II. THE PATTERN BENEATH THE PATTERN ......................... 48 III. MONOLOGIC AND DIALOGIC L A N G U A G E ......................... 103 IV. THE PILOT PROJECT ........................... 144 A Study of Dialogic and Monologic Prompts and Writing Strategies................. 144 Part A: Goals of the S t u d y ............ 158 Part B: Design of the S t u d y .......................... 159 The Construct of the Essay Prompts ................... 161 Results of the Pilot P r o j e c t .......................... 167 V. IMPLICATION OF THE PILOT S T U D Y .......................... 195 APPENDIXES A. English Theme Topics: Directions ..... 206 B. Resolved Essay P r o m p t s ..................... 208 C. Pilot Project Prompts .......................... 210 D. Student Essay Placement Chart .............. 212 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................... 214 v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 PROMPT 1 .................................................... 168 2 PROMPT 2 .................................................... 169 3 PROMPT 3 .................................................... 170 vi PREFACE The term "baaic" has been applied to a group of writers who exhibit skills at considerably lower levels than those of standard or "nonreme- dial" writers. When Mina Shaughnessy first categorized basic writers as a group in her book, Errors and Expectations, in 1977, new theories emerged concerning these writers. These were the students who were in­ experienced with composing skills and paralyzed by the fear of creating errors within a written text. Teachers searched the writing patterns of these students and the logic behind their errors to create a working pedagogy for these language-users. Much of the emerging pedagogy I found useful in my seven years of teaching basic writers in The Writing Workshop at The Ohio State Univer­ sity. The desire to further investigate specific writing patterns and composing stragegies of basic writers was the impetus for this disserta­ tion. The primary focus of this dissertation is my definition of basic writers as those who combine both oral and textual composing strategies within their written work. By Investigating the traits of both oral and textual cultures and linking these traits to monologic and dialogic language, I hope to provide a new insight into the writing patterns of basic writers. vii To evaluate other possible determinants which might influence the composing styles of basic writers, it was first necessary to consider additional studies based on this group which offered other explanations for their writing patterns. Chapter I of my dissertation discusses the work of Basil Bernstein, Richard Ohmann, and Walter Loban— all of whom equate, to some degree, language and social-class structure. While my own theories regarding basic writers are not in accord with those researchers who equate social class and language, their de­ scriptions of the writers they studied— very similar to Shaughnessy's— permitted my study of basic writers as a group which shared common characteristics. Building on these common descriptions, I Introduce in Chapter II my definition of basic writers as those who use both oral and textual traits in composing patterns. Central to my argument is Alexander Lurla's theory that "beginning" writers' written language shows charact­ eristics of oral speech, but also Includes consciously learned writing techniques. Luria's description provides the connection necessary to evaluate these writers as those who are actually suspended between oral and textual cultures, exhibiting features of each. I explore orallty and textuality further in Chapter II using student writing samples that exhibit characteristics of both cultures. Chapter III uses these same characteristics to make contextual con­ nections between oral traits and dialogic language, on the one hand, and textual traits and monologic language,