國立虎尾科技大學 |

Teachers' Conceptualizations of Writing and Thinking in Social Studies.

Record Type:	Language materials, manuscript : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Teachers' Conceptualizations of Writing and Thinking in Social Studies./
Author:	Stoll, Michael R.
Description:	1 online resource (268 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-07(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International79-07A(E).
Subject:	Social sciences education. -
Online resource:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9780355633023

Teachers' Conceptualizations of Writing and Thinking in Social Studies.
Stoll, Michael R.

Teachers' Conceptualizations of Writing and Thinking in Social Studies. - 1 online resource (268 pages)

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-07(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--New York University, 2018.

Includes bibliographical references

The "college readiness" movement of the past decade coupled with the widespread adoption of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) has generated pressure on content area teachers to develop disciplinary thinking skills while also providing more opportunities for student writing. The purpose of this three-article dissertation is to understand the ways in which secondary social studies teachers conceptualize the notion of disciplinary writing and the impact of teachers' stances toward discipline-specific writing on their instructional choices. Specifically, this research seeks to identify where social studies teachers see the connections between disciplinary thinking and writing processes and what pedagogical strategies and cognitive tools teachers use to make these connections apparent to their students. The first research article presents the results of a design-based, mixed methods case study of two groups of social studies teachers from different mixed-income suburban schools as they designed and implemented similar frameworks for writing instruction using cognitive scaffolds. In both cases, the teachers' work reflected the dual pressures of CCSS and the teachers' own beliefs about effective teaching in social studies. While both collaborative groups identified a similar set of necessary argumentative writing skills, each group utilized a variety of scaffolding tools and visible thinking strategies that reflected an emphasis on content area writing strategies rather than a disciplinary literacy approach. The second article describes a semester-long, design-based case study, in which four ninth-grade world studies teachers developed a framework for writing based on five key components and implemented a set of cognitive scaffolding tools for writing and thinking in their mixed-ability, pre-AP history courses. The teachers believed they improved their writing instruction by teaching each key component separately and repeatedly using cognitive tools, but there were fewer changes to teachers' instruction of historical thinking skills. The third article utilized an embedded case study approach to examine how these same four teachers' conceptualizations of disciplinary thinking surrounding controversial issues affected the choices they made with regards to writing instruction. The case study involved detailed analysis of a single instructional unit on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including teacher interviews, group planning sessions, classroom observations, and collection of instructional artifacts. Results of the study indicate that instruction on controversial issues can be used to make connections between disciplinary thinking strategies and literacy strategies in social studies and that explicit instruction using cognitive scaffolding tools can promote evidence collection and perspective-taking skills.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2018

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9780355633023Subjects--Topical Terms:

1179940
Social sciences education.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

Teachers' Conceptualizations of Writing and Thinking in Social Studies.
LDR:04123ntm a2200361Ki 4500 001 918194
005 20181022132747.5
006 m o u
007 cr mn||||a|a||
008 190606s2018 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9780355633023
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI10742867
035 $a (MiAaPQ)steinhardt.nyu:10552
035 $a AAI10742867
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Stoll, Michael R. $3 1192454
245 1 0 $a Teachers' Conceptualizations of Writing and Thinking in Social Studies.
264 0 $c 2018
300 $a 1 online resource (268 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 79-07(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: Diana B. Turk.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--New York University, 2018.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a The "college readiness" movement of the past decade coupled with the widespread adoption of Common Core State Standards (CCSS) has generated pressure on content area teachers to develop disciplinary thinking skills while also providing more opportunities for student writing. The purpose of this three-article dissertation is to understand the ways in which secondary social studies teachers conceptualize the notion of disciplinary writing and the impact of teachers' stances toward discipline-specific writing on their instructional choices. Specifically, this research seeks to identify where social studies teachers see the connections between disciplinary thinking and writing processes and what pedagogical strategies and cognitive tools teachers use to make these connections apparent to their students. The first research article presents the results of a design-based, mixed methods case study of two groups of social studies teachers from different mixed-income suburban schools as they designed and implemented similar frameworks for writing instruction using cognitive scaffolds. In both cases, the teachers' work reflected the dual pressures of CCSS and the teachers' own beliefs about effective teaching in social studies. While both collaborative groups identified a similar set of necessary argumentative writing skills, each group utilized a variety of scaffolding tools and visible thinking strategies that reflected an emphasis on content area writing strategies rather than a disciplinary literacy approach. The second article describes a semester-long, design-based case study, in which four ninth-grade world studies teachers developed a framework for writing based on five key components and implemented a set of cognitive scaffolding tools for writing and thinking in their mixed-ability, pre-AP history courses. The teachers believed they improved their writing instruction by teaching each key component separately and repeatedly using cognitive tools, but there were fewer changes to teachers' instruction of historical thinking skills. The third article utilized an embedded case study approach to examine how these same four teachers' conceptualizations of disciplinary thinking surrounding controversial issues affected the choices they made with regards to writing instruction. The case study involved detailed analysis of a single instructional unit on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including teacher interviews, group planning sessions, classroom observations, and collection of instructional artifacts. Results of the study indicate that instruction on controversial issues can be used to make connections between disciplinary thinking strategies and literacy strategies in social studies and that explicit instruction using cognitive scaffolding tools can promote evidence collection and perspective-taking skills.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2018
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Social sciences education. $3 1179940
650 4 $a Secondary education. $3 1179560
650 4 $a Curriculum development. $3 1148494
650 4 $a Language arts. $3 556677
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0534
690 $a 0533
690 $a 0727
690 $a 0279
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a New York University. $b Teaching and Learning. $3 1190326
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 79-07A(E).
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=10742867 $z click for full text (PQDT)