Author: José Luis Gallego Ortega
Author: Antonio Rodríguez Fuentes
Year of publication: 2015
Source: Show
Pages: 52-64
DOI Address: https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2015.42.4.04
PDF: tner/201504/tner20150404.pdf

Acquiring writing skills requires an entire academic lifetime but acceptable levels of proficiency should be covered in compulsory education. This research verifies the beginner, intermediate and advanced levels of writing skills in the Spanish education system. It compares both the development of knowledge and the associated difficulties in interviews with 40 students from the even years of primary and secondary education. Descriptive and correlational analyses were made, after coding their statements according to the theoretical model used. They revealed an unexpected stagnation, depending on the levels, with important educational implications.

REFERENCES:

  • Álvarez, M.L., & García, J.N. (2014). Writer evolution process from primary to secondary education. Journal of Psychodidactics, 19 (1), 5-26.
  • Bardin, L. (1986). Content analysis. Madrid: Akal.
  • Beauvais, C., Olive, T., & Passerault, J.M. (2011). Why are some texts good and others not? Relationship between text quality and online management of the writing processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 415-428. doi: 10.1037/a0022545.
  • Fox, D. (1981). The research process in education. Pamplona: Eunsa. Gallego, J.L. (2008a). Planning written expression of students with mental retardation. Journal of Education, 346, 267-290. Gallego, J.L. (2008b). Planning the expression written by primary school pupils. Bordón, 60 (2), 63-76.
  • Gallego, J.L., & González, J. (2008). How to plan the written composition intellectually gifted students. Journal of Educational Research, 26 (2), 463-484.
  • García, A., & Salvador, F. (2010). How to write Roma students. Implications for educational practice. Madrid: EOS.
  • García, J.N., & Fidalgo, R. (2003). Changes in metacognition of the psychological processes of writing in students from 3rd to 3rd ESO EP. Journal of General and Applied Psychology, 56 (2), 239-251.
  • González, M.ª J., & Martín, I. (2006). Performance analysis in written composition and its difficulties in secondary education. Journal for the Study of Education and Development, 29 (3), 315-326.
  • Gutiérrez, R., & Salvador, F. (2006). The planning process in the written expression of deaf students: case studies in Secondary Education. Journal of Education, 339, 435-453.
  • Hayes, J.R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In C.M. Levy y S.R. Ransdell (eds), The Science of Writing (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Hayes, J.R., & Flower, L.S. (1980). Identifying the organization of writing process. In L.W. Gregg. y E.R. Steinberg (eds.), Cognitive process in writing (pp. 3-30). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Krippendorff, K. (2002). Content analysis methodology. Theory and practice. Barcelona: Paidós.
  • Lecuona, M.ª P., Rodríguez, M.ª J., & Sánchez, M.ª C. (2003). Written evaluation models in primary education composition. Journal of Education, 332, 301-326.
  • Ramos, J.L., Cuadrado, I., & Iglesias, B. (2005). Written in students of Elementary and Secondary Education composition. Culture and Education, 17 (3), 239-251.
  • Rodríguez, A. (2007). Syntactic dysfunctions found in narrative texts produced by students with low vision and blindness. Journal of Education, 343, 531-451.
  • Salvador, F. (2004). Structural features of narrative text written by students with learning difficulties. Journal of Science Education, 198-99, 285-305.
  • Salvador, F. (2008). Psychology and pedagogy of written language. Madrid: EOS.
  • Salvador, F., & García, A. (2009). The review process in written composition elementary school students. Spanish Journal of Pedagogy, 242, 61-76.

Wiadomość do:

 

 

© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.

Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart