The role of comprehension monitoring in Children's revision

Environmental, cognitive, and metacognitive influences on text revision: Assessing the evidence

“…As predicted by the model, findings by Englert et al (1988) show development of metacognitive understanding of writing and revision, as do findings by Beal (1996). More than a year in reading achievement separated the high achievers from the low achievers and disabled achievers in the study by Englert et al; but Gordon examined development for less than a year.…”

EVAPROMES, una escala para evaluar los procesos metacognitivos en escritura

“…Educators have taken an interest in writing primarily as a tool for cognitive development; for this reason, it is important to understand the metacognitive strategies that foster writing skills: a) Make students write frequently; few scholastic activities produce more cognitive development than making students write often and providing feedback on their writing (Calkins, 1994); b) Create an informal, supportive environment for writing; this promotes spontaneous, creative writing (Englert, Raphael, Anderson, Anthony & Stevens, 1991); c) Strengthen pre-writing strategies as a condition needed for organizing its execution (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1987); d) Emphasize transformation of knowledge rather than narrating it (Beal, 1996); e) Encourage the student to develop productive revision strategies; dialogue with the peer group can improve revision strategies (Englert et al, 1991); f) Use computer technology when needed, the use of computers can particularly facilitate the writing of quality stories (Berninger, Vaughan, Abbott, Abbott, Rogan, Brooks, Reed & Graham, 1997).…”

Writing with peer response using genre knowledge : a classroom intervention study

“…Such revisions can contribute to text coherence (McCutchen, 2008). A number of studies (Beal, 1996;Beason, 1993;Fitzgerald, 1987; documented that young writers find it difficult to make sensible revisions on their own. For example, students find it difficult to detect problems in their texts, if there is no one pointing at such problems from a readers' perspective.…”

“…To revise effectively the writer must focus on what was actually written, rather than on what was meant. Beal (1996) concluded that until the midelementary school years (grades 3-4) students do not grasp this distinction between the literal and intended meaning of their texts. A clear conception of the literal meaning is necessary to be able to evaluate parts of the text, to give adequate diagnoses of problems detected, and to eliminate problems by reformulating unclear sentences or bigger parts of the text.…”

“…In addition, these students probably also need other facilitating measures for revising. Beal (1996) and Butterfield, Hacker & Albertson (1996) point to the fact that familiarity with topic and genre are important factors for facilitating revision. Students' ability to notice comprehension problems caused by their texts depends to a large extent on background knowledge necessary to clarify comprehension problems.…”