This paper presents a meta-analysis of theory and research about writing and writing pedagogy, identifying six discourses -configurations of beliefs and practices in relation to the teaching of writing. It introduces and explains a framework for the analysis of educational data about writing pedagogy in which the connections are drawn across views of language, views of writing, views of learning to write, approaches to the teaching of writing, and approaches to the assessment of writing. The framework can be used for identifying discourses of writing in data such as policy documents, teaching and learning materials, recordings of pedagogic practice, interviews and focus groups with teachers and learners, and media coverage of literacy education. The paper also proposes that, while there are tensions and contradictions among these discourses, a comprehensive writing pedagogy might integrate teaching approaches from all six.Keywords: discourses, writing, literacy, analytical framework, learning, teaching IntroductionMy aim is to present and explain a framework which I have developed for the analysis of a variety of types of data concerned with the teaching of writing: data such as policy documents, teaching and learning materials, recordings of pedagogic practice, interviews and focus groups with teachers and learners, and media coverage of literacy education. I propose that such data can be analysed for evidence of the underlying beliefs of those from whom it originated. Policy, practice and opinions about literacy education are usually underpinned, consciously or subconsciously, by particular ways of conceptualising writing, and by particular ways of conceptualising how writing can be learned. These different ways of conceptualising literacy lie at the heart of 'discourses' in the broadest sense: recognisable associations among values, beliefs and practices which lead to particular forms of situated action, to particular decisions, choices and omissions, as well as to particular wordings. The ways in which people talk about writing and learning to write, and the actions they take as learners, teachers and assessors, are instantiations of discourses of writing and learning to write: the purpose of this paper is to identify these discourses.I start by mentioning briefly the work of others who have discussed theories, metaphors, ideologies and discourses which underpin pedagogic practice in literacy education. I then present a view of language consisting of four interdependent layers, drawing on Fairclough (1989Fairclough ( , 1992a, Ivaniè (1998) and Jones (1990). The main part of the paper uses this view of language to structure the identification of six 'discourses of writing and learning to write' consisting of sets of beliefs about writing and learning to write, and practices of teaching and assessment of writing associated with these beliefs. Much of what I present in these sections has been discussed in greater detail elsewhere. I will do no more than outline the features of each set of beliefs and practices,...

No abstract

This article argues for the differentiation according to timescales of aspects of writer identity. It presents a framework for investigating the discoursal construction of writer identity that develops the categories proposed by Ivanič in two ways. First, it distinguishes aspects of writer identity according to the timescales over which they develop; second, it proposes interrelationships among the different aspects. The authors demonstrate the relevance of this framework for understanding how identity is constructed and changed through acts of writing by using it to interpret data drawn from a study of writing in adult literacy education in England.

No abstract

No abstract