Abstract:
This Study compares the writing performance prompted by an imaginative writing task to that prompted by non-imaginative writing tasks, in two secondary school geography classrooms. The imaginative task was found to prompt thinking, writing and learning performance that was markedly superior to that prompted by the non-imaginative tasks set. The differences were apparent, to a greater or lesser degree, in each of the measures used: Task Engagement, Amount, Completion, Originality, Relevance, Writing Competence, Factual Correctness, and Thinking Processes.
Speak-aloud protocols done during the imaginative writing task showed patterns of thought that, for most but not all students, had several positive characteristics. These included the conscious analysis of prior knowledge, the analysis and evaluation of data and ideas, the deliberate creation of problem-solving strategies, and meta-cognitive awareness. None of these features of thought were apparent during the non-imaginative protocols.
Eleven case studies of individual students are included, with prominence given to their spoken comments during interviews and speak-aloud protocols. The case study material suggests that students' perceptions of tasks and their subsequent task engagement is a powerful determining influence on the character and success of writing-to-learn behaviours. One reason for this was revealed by think-aloud protocols that showed that writing-to-learn performance is a highly-emotional process in which a student's state of mind not only influences their general motivation but can also impinge directly on the operation and outcomes of their attempts to solve specific problems.
