Discourses in Teachers’ Talk about Writing

Abstract

Views about what writing is and how it should be taught have varied over the years as well as across contexts. Studies of curricula, teaching materials, and teaching practices have shown a strong focus on skills, genres, and processes, but few have asked teachers about their perspectives on writing. In this article we explore what views, or discourses, of writing are currently active among teachers in Swedish compulsory education, covering ages from 7 to 15. Sixty teachers answered a questionnaire with open and closed questions. Using Ivanič’s framework for discourses of writing, the answers were analyzed holistically in order to define what main discourse, or discourses, each teacher represented. Results show that most teachers represent one main discourse, but that a combination of discourses occur, in particular among teachers from the earliest school years (1–3). The most common discourse was the process discourse, followed by genre, creativity, skills, and thinking. None of the teachers represented the social practice or the sociopolitical discourse. The results concur with findings from studies of curricula, teaching materials, and teaching practices both in Sweden and globally and are discussed in relation to what literacy skills may be necessary in the 21st century in order to participate in social and political life.

Back to basics? Discourses of writing in Facebook groups for teachers

“…Learning is related to disciplinary literacy, and focuses on the content of the current school subject. In line with Sturk and Lindgren (2019), this discourse appears above all in interactions concerning grades 7-9. This might be explained by a stronger focus on the content as such.…”

“…Further, the lack of a socio-political discourse is emphasised. Earlier studies have also identified a negotiation of discourses in teachers' talk about practice and that teachers position themselves in a combination of discourses (McCarthey et al, 2014;Sturk & Lindgren, 2019). This negotiation and positioning can be regarded as possibilities for agency, for both teachers and pupils (Holmberg E. Sturk, A.-C. Randahl & C. Olin-Scheller 4 & Wirdenäs, 2010;Randahl, 2012).…”

“…In studies of teaching practice, a skills discourse is prevalent (Lambirth, 2016;McCarthey, Woodard, & Kang, 2014), together with a genre and a process discourse in compulsory school (Blikstad-Balas, 2018;Blikstad-Balas, Roe, & Klette, 2018;Sturk & Lindgren, 2019). Further, the lack of a socio-political discourse is emphasised.…”

“…In the curriculum from 1969 and 1980, narrative and descriptive genres were put forward. Moreover, a process discourse was influential from the 1980's (Sturk & Lindgren, 2019). Today, a genre discourse is prominent in policy documents.…”

Conceptualisations of writing in the curricula and the teachers’ guides of Greek preschool education: a critical discourse analysis

“…Ivanič’s framework has been used for different analytical purposes such as assessment, academic writing and students’ perceptions of writing and learning to write (Wohlwend, 2009; Baker, 2011; Lundgren, 2013; Lambirth, 2016) but important contributions have been made in relation to curriculum studies. Concerning the relationship between curriculum documents and teachers’ perspectives and practices on writing, Sturk and Lindgren (2019) investigated 60 teachers’ views in Swedish compulsory education (7–15 years of age) in relation to three themes: ‘how teachers work with writing, what they think is most important in writing, and how they evaluate pupils’ writing’ (p. 507). Their views revealed the dominance of the process discourse which was combined with the discourses of creativity, skills and genre.…”