JOURNAL
OF THE
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
VOL.1
1998
INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION
LAGOS STATE UNIVERSITY
LAGOS, NIGERIA
CONTENTS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Curriculum Implementation in Nigeria: Strategies for the
21st Century.................................................................…
—
Prof. P. Okebuhola
1
Popularisation Science at Pre-Primary and Primary School
Levels.................................................................................…
—
Tunde Owolabi
9
Excur-Play Instructional Approach to Primary School
Geometry...................................................................……
—
S.A Adebiyi
15
Determination of the Nutritional Value of Fatty Food
Products................................................………………….
—
M. J. Alegbe
21
The Use of Analogies in Education: Implications for Science
Teaching and Learning.........................................................…
—
Fabinu Emmanuel Oluwole
27
Arabic and Islamic Studies in the Nigerian National Policy in
Education.......................................................................……..
—
Sulaiman Akorede Popoola
33
7.
Parental Factors and Mother Tongue Instruction...............…..
—
Olumuyiwa Viatonu
8.
Enhancing Indigenous Language Teaching and Learning
Through Instructional Media..........................................……
—
Solomon O. Makinde
9.
Writing Across the Curriculum: Implications for School
39
45
Administrators...............................................................…….
—
A.N. Okorie (Mrs)
10.
The Standard of Written English of Pre-Degree Science
Students of Lagos State University................................…..
—
Y.O. Awodele
53
65
11.
Mother Tongue Influence on Nigerian English..............…..
—
Idowu Sylvester Olajire
75
12.
Asphixiants of Adult Literacy in Nigeria...................................
—
A. O. K. Noah
83
13.
The Status of Continuing Education in Lifelong Education......
—
S. A. Saula
93
14.
Creating Job Opportunities Through Educational Technology
Centres.......................................................................................
—
Abifarin Michael Segun
99
15.
Towards Effective Practice of Educational Technology in
Nigeria..............................................................:........................ 107
—
E.O. Ayodele
16.
Environmental Factors and Physical Facilities in the School
System..............................................…………........................
—
B.O. Amoo (Mrs.)
111
Students' Awareness of Sexuality and its Implication for
Counselling in Schools.............................................................
—
B.I. Obadofin (Mrs.)
117
17.
18.
The Menace of Cultism in Nigerian Educational System and
Strategies for the Way Out........................................................ 125
—
BO. Uhumuavbi
19.
Motivational Provisions in Aid of Sports Performance by
Principals of Secondary Schools................................................ 135
—
Matthew Clement Ituh
20.
Moral Education and Nation Building....................................... 139
—
Y.A Akinkuotu
21.
A Study of the Socio-Economic Condition of Junior Workers
in Lagos State University........................................................... 147
—
S.A. Alamutu
22.
Legal Dimensions to Physical Education Practices.................... 155
—
Adelaja Adekunle Abdul
23.
Determinants of Students Participation in Sports at Tertiary
Education Level.......................................................................... 161
—
O.O. Odedeyi and N.Y Abejide
24.
Management of Intra-Organizational Conflicts in Promoting
Standards in Nigerian Tertiary Educational Institutions........... 169
—
Mopelola Ayo-Sobowale (Mrs.)
Journal of Institute of Education 1998 Vol. 1, (53-63)
9
Writing Across the Curriculum: Implications for School
Administrators
A.N. OKORIE (MRS.)
Dept. of Educational Management, Unilorin.
ABSTRACT
This paper seeks to indicate that writing across the curriculum is a highly
desirable development for several reasons. Perhaps most prominent of these is the
tendency for such writing to serve as a powerful catalyst for learning. Exploring a
subject through writing can lead to a discovery, of new insights and the
realization that additional research on a topic is needed. The implication of these
findings, for school administrators, has been discussed to assist them in fulfilling
their instructional leadership support functions in language arts more effectively.
INTRODUCTION
The importance of language arts cannot be over-emphasized, since no subject can
be successfully studied without adequate language skills.
One of the most significant curricular development lately has been the
emergence of concern in the area of language, and especially, of writing to learn
across the curriculum. Sunderman (1985) has asserted that writing has for
centuries been educationally important. To be literate means to have the ability to
read and to express oneself clearly and logically in a language. Hence, "writing is
too valuable to be left in the English department" (Gary 1988:729). Additionally,
in the process of trying to make writing fit the purposes of teaching, faculty
members from pre-primary to tertiary level, may themselves learn something.
Contemporary research studies have also indicated the highly active nature of
language learning and have pinpointed connections among the multifarious
language skills. Accordingly, current pedagogy stresses the integration of the
language arts of listening, speaking, reading, writing Busing media. As Fulwiler
and Young (1982) have aptly argued, raging students to develop the language
skills in an integrated manner enables them to make desired progress both in
learning all language skills and in learning other content area knowledge.
Thus, the purpose of this paper is to examine current developments in
writing to learn across the curriculum. It is also an attempt to highlight the
53
importance of school administrators' strong leadership in language arts
instructional improvement by discussing some of what instructional leaders
should be doing in the light of recent research on language arts and school
effectiveness. The issues addressed in the remainder of this discourse include: a
definition; rationale for writing to learn across the curriculum; historical and
current perspectives on Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC) as well as the
leadership functions of school administrators.
Writing to learn is not learning to write. It is the task of the English
language teachers to worry about the "nuts and bolts" of written composition
grammar, sentence structure, spelling and other areas of written composition. The
primary goal of writing across the curriculum is learning content, even though
writing skills would certainly improve through practice. In the writing to learn
approach, writing is a means for clear and logical communication. The actual
process of writing in any discipline is an integral part of learning the content of
that discipline. The approach encourages students though and the synthesis of
knowledge (Myers 1994).
Mayher, Lester & Pradl (1983) have similarly remarked that writing to
learn is not a process of taking in and recalling the information given by the
teacher, or developing and achieving skills but rather, it is "a meaning-making
process that involves the learners actively building connections between what they
are learning and what they already know" (p. 1). Teachers using the writing to
learn approach do not spend time checking comma faults or spelling errors, they
are mainly concerned with the quality of ideas expressed and the clarity with
which these ideas are expressed. However, it should be remembered that writing
to learn and learning to write are two sides of the same coin in the secondary
school especially. The two are essential.
RATIONALE FOR WRITING ACROSS THE CURRICULUM
Glatthorn (1981) has suggested three reasons why writing should be made
an important part of learning in all areas of the school curriculum. First, if a Home
Economics teacher and a Mathematics or Physics teacher accentuate writing in
their classrooms, students in such classes would improve their understanding of
those disciplines because writing is a way of knowing. The process of writing
demands students to organize what they know and through the act of writing
students discover new insights. Most educators also agree that writing is an active
process which ameliorates learning problems.
Secondly, opportunity for guided practice provided in several classrooms
will increase students' ability to write. Again, if a science teacher shares with an
African literature class a scientific view of Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart
and a Physical and Health Education class is shown how to write pamphlets on
non-competitive games, surely students' ability to write evaluative prose will
54
begin to grow. Another subtle effect of such an all-school emphasis on writing is
its influence on students attitudes toward writing. Stress on writing in all content
areas will eliminate students-teachers assumption that writing is only important in
English language classes.
Thirdly, if writing across the curriculum is well planned and implemented
effectively, it would be an invaluable way of promoting interdepartmental cooperation. Teachers from across the departments of a school coming together to
talk about the inquiry process of their discipline and the types of writing that is
necessary in their field will be able to understand the task and appreciate the effort
of one another as they work together to improve students learning.
HISTORICAL AND CURRENT PERSPECTIVES
While the concept of writing across the curriculum may seem to be new, the idea
is an "old-but-new" one that dates back to academic and progressive era. James
Fleming Hosic, founder of National Council for Teachers of English, in 1913,
propagated the idea that if students write in every class, they will become better
writers and better learners. This idea was not labelled with the term writing across
the curriculum but was called "co-operation" (Russ'ell 1986, p. 34.).
Hosic's promotion of "co-operation" has been based on the premises
language and learning. Hosic, like modern theorists, believe that "Language is the
core of education and society" (Russel, p. 34). It is almost identical with thought
as nearly all our thinking is done with words. A Russian educator, Lee Vygotsky,
who many WAC proponents refer to has the same view that the relationship
between thought and word is a living process because thought is born through
words.
What all this implies is that since we think with language, we also learn
with language. As a result, writing can facilitate learning in every class. Russell
(1986) has cited Shuman who is also of the view that students who write about
topics understand them better. In addition, Hosic opined that as soon as teachers
understand this and act accordingly, many problems will be practically solved.
This is not to say that Hosic thought the task would be easy. He had
foreseen some obstacles in form of faculty members resentment to the lofty idea
of "co-operation". In order to resolve such a problem, Hosic suggested that
teachers should be fully educated. Teachers' training should be broadened to
eradicate the overspecialization and one-sided preparation which can result in
mutual lack of sympathy and support and tend to disintegrate the life of the pupil
instead of harmonizing it. Hosic was convinced that for cooperation to succeed,
teachers must possess a "breadth and catholicity of interest" (Russell, p. 34). For
this reason he then recommended that universities incorporate in all aspects of the
curriculum writing programmes to give teachers necessary writing skills. This
55
concept is now gaining currency through the work of Fulwiler and others in
College Writing Across the Curriculum.
Of recent the teacher of reading and writing has become one of the most
talked about phenomena in and outside of education. As a result of the
dissatisfaction with these two communication skills, much more talking, reading
and writing are now being encouraged to take place in the classrooms in order to
enhance learning and to explore course content.
Writing, as has been noted by Dyson (1983), gives students the
opportunity to learn. Learning here means the process by which the students
construct their experiences in order to make them available to themselves to learn
from. It is therefore necessary to see writing as a process of learning or
understanding and not just as a way of feeding back information that is already
learned. Writing across the curriculum movement, with its interdisciplinary
learning across the curriculum, is again gaining ground and support from many
educators especially in Britain and in the United States of America.
The resurgence of the concept of writing across the curriculum started
from the study conducted by Britton and his colleagues in England. And as
Glatthorn (1987) has added, a reinterest in the concept developed from two
intersecting research thrusts. One of the thrusts is the research into the composing
process of how skilled and unskilled writers generally work through a process that
consists of several interactive and recursive stages. The stages of the writing
process according to Maimon (1988) include prewriting, drafting, sharing,
revising, editing and publishing.
Prewriting:
this is the time writers gather information, experiment with ideas,
think about what it is they want to say and how, reflect about their audience and
make provisional plays for their writing. Activities during this time also comprise
daydreaming, drawing, reading, role-playing and other that prepare students for
writing.
Drafting:
during this stage students begin to write their ideas on the paper.
The purpose here is to encourage students that they know something that they can
write on their paper and of course what they write can be sifted through and
organized later.
Sharing:
this phase helps writers to get a mental distance from the piece of
writing. Writers read their piece aloud to peers or to the teacher. Feedback is
given to writers by listeners in the form of questions or comments. The activity
enables writers to amend their pieces to suit their intended audience.
56
Revising:
the revising step enables writers to expand ideas, clarify meanings
and reorganize as necessary in the larger elements of content. Revising is crafting.
It is the deliberate reworking of material to fulfil the writer's dream and such
reworking means making changes in one, two or more areas: content,
organization, and style. Mechanics, usage and grammar are not included here.
These are considered in the editing process. Revising assumes multiple drafts,
even with a beginning writer. It also assumes the teacher and other students as
readers. Students must be taught both how to revise their own work and how to
help others do the same.
Editing:
editing involves the writer focusing on the overall mechanicspunctuation, usage, handwriting and spellings, During this stage students should
have access to reference materials such as dictionaries, thesauruses and others that
might be helpful to them. At the earlier stages of writing, the emphasis is placed
on content, organization and style. Only at this time, as the content is being
considered for others to read, do the mechanics of language become important.
Thus, writers now polish their writing as they pay close attention to matters of
form.
Publishing:
here writers are given the opportunity, as Madimon (1988) puts it,
"to celebrate their authorship" (p.734). This may take the form of displaying
students' writings on the bulletin boards and classrooms publishing in the local or
school newspapers. This provides the students with a larger audience.
Glatthorn (1987) has reported that unskilled writers tend not to pay
attention to the process. These writers usually skip the prewriting stage and start
by sketching with no regard to thinking. Then as they begin to write they are
bugged down with matters of form and poor writers see revision as a burden. The
goal of composing-process research is to provide teachers with a model with
which they could teach writing.
The second thrust of the research consists of inquiry into the uses of
writing in the classrooms. Applebee and Britton's studies cited in Gerald (1982)
have indicated that what occupy the classrooms as writing are such exercises as
filling in the blanks, giving short answers to questions in someone else's language.
In other words, very little requires students to use their imaginations. These types
of activities do not promote writing or learning.
This leads to the question of whether writing should be used as a way of
learning in all disciplines. Many writers have put forth various reasons in favour
of using writing as a means of learning. These writers advocate that:
First, writing is integrative as it involves one's total intellectual
capacities. Secondly, when one writes, the lexical, syntactics, and
rhetorical constraints of language demand explicit and systematic
symbol manipulation, which in turn facilitates learning. Next, writing
57
serves an epistemic function: representations of human knowledge are
modified in the process of being written down. Also, writing is a unique
mode of learning, involving the enactive, the iconic, and symbolic
modes. Further , the act of writing provides both immediate and longterm self-provided feedback. And writing is active and personal,
providing access to one's tacit knowledge. Finally, writing is a selfpaced mode of learning; the pace of writing seems to match better the
pace of learning (Glatthorn, 1987, pp. 318-319).
As it was stated earlier, writing as a tool for learning is no more important
in the English class than it is in most other classes. Responsibility for teaching
writing and other language arts skills cannot be delegated solely to English
teachers. Therefore, English teachers must assist other content area teachers to see
writing as a major avenue to learning in their particular classes. Mayher et al
(1983) have opined that one of the effective ways English teachers can help
teachers in other disciplines to become convinced of the potentials of writing to
learn is to orientate the entire faculty above general purpose of the programme
and then get them involved in a three-step process which they have described.
The first step is that the English teachers ask their colleagues to:
1.
Define a learning objective in their respective disciplines which is
appropriate for the students. Since not all learning is facilitated by
writing, English teachers need to realize this earlier in order to encourage
their across colleagues to think of uses of writing to learn. The objective
must be real and an objective rather than an activity.
2.
Frame a writing task or assignment which would help students achieve
the specified objective. The emphasis here should be on learning not on
writing. The assignment should be such that both the students' purpose
and the intended audience are clearly defined. Before letting teachers act
on the first two steps, it is necessary to provide them with one or two
examples so that they will become familiar with what is required.
3.
Ask teachers to define what criteria they would use to determine whether
or not the learning has been accomplished. The emphasis should always
be on learning not on writing. "How do the learning criteria relate to the
criteria for evaluating writing? The conclusion should be that the criteria
for evaluating the writing are means criteria while the learning evaluation
is concerned with the desired end" (p. 97).
Through writing to learn, students are helped to develop the ability to
evaluate whether or not they have learnt the material. Allowing students to be
responsible for their own learning minimizes their dependence upon teachers "for
validation of their worth as students" (p. 97). Important writing to learn takes
place in logs, journals, note entries whose audience is the writers for the purpose
58
of helping the writers discover meaning and privately evaluate their progress. As
Mayner et al, have succinctly declared, "if we are to be in the business of
education rather than that of schooling, one of our long-range goals must be to
help students become life-long learners. Developing their ability to use writing to
learn and their confidence and enjoyment in the process and its products should be placed high on our education priorities" (p. 98).
SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS LEADERSHIP FUNCTIONS FOR
INCREASING LANGUAGE ARTS INSTRUCTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
A very important implication for school administrators, that has emerged from the
foregoing analysis of curriculum development in English language arts, is that
there are specific actions which they can take in order to increase instructional
effectiveness.
What effective administrators do depend to a great extent on their
knowledge. It would be almost impracticable of an administrator to provide
leadership to the instructional programme without a measure of technical
knowledge about the cardinal responsibility of school learning. Since learning is
the end and instruction is the primary medium, the effective school administrator
must also possess a functional knowledge of instruction. By extension, the
effective school head must know and understand the learners — the students —
and the teacher.
Consequently, in order to contribute to instructional effectiveness in
writing to learn across the curriculum and language arts programme, the school
administrators must be particularly knowledgeable in writing to learn and
language arts programme and exert leadership in this area. It is their responsibility
to supervise the entire English and language arts programme and know how these
programmes relate to the psychology of learning and child development. The
success of any school programme as can be deduced from virtually all the studies,
often centres around the leadership support and encouragement of the
administrators. In effect, the administrators in effective writing and language arts
programme must function mainly as instructional leaders who will chart the
course of the school's writing and language arts programme (Edmonds, 1982).
Criscuolo (1985) has subscribed that without such leadership, the writing and
language arts programme will drift aimlessly and even result into a failure.
Teachers need direction and support from their administrators. They appreciate
and respect knowledgeable administrators who are readers and thinkers; who keep
abreast of current developments in the various school curricula and make certain
pride in being "in the know" as well as provide their staff with continuing
professional training that are current, relevant and practical.
59
The administrators must act as team leaders, guiding the faculty toward
sound decisions regarding specific and attainable goals for day-by-day teaching
and providing the means by which these goals can be achieved. Not only should
they guide in defining and forming these goals, they must see to it that these goals
are shared and communicated to teachers, students, parents and the community
(Osborn et al, 1985). Other effective school characteristics such as high but
realistic student/teacher expectations, safe and orderly climate conducive to
teaching and learning, effective monitoring system and evaluation, instructional
focus and parents and community involvement are essential to instructional
effectiveness. It has also been found that those administrators who promote these
elements of effective language arts programmes systematically observe in the
classrooms and systematically respond to the observations (Edmonds &
Frederickson, 1979; in Samuels & Pearson, (1988).
In promoting high expectations, the administrators in writing to learn and
language arts programme must first hold high expectations for themselves and
then act as models for students and teachers, motivating them to make writing to
learn a top priority in their classes. Secondly, as attention is focussed on learning
progress, every academic excellence must be recognized through various awards.
Thirdly, practices which convey the importance of high achievement in such
things as regularly assigned and graded writing or reading homework, policies
that permit participation in extra-curricular activities only if course grades are
high and quick notification of parents when expectations are not being met must
be promoted (Murphy & Hallinger, 1985). The strong administrative leadership
that promotes high expectations will contribute to an atmosphere of success,
excitement and joy.
Perhaps the most important instructional support function which
administrators can provide is the establishment of a safe and orderly climate
which will facilitate effective writing and language arts programme. Orderliness
here is critical to students' achievements and the administrators are the key to
achieving this. Administrators must devote attention to creating orderly and
purposeful environment in order to reduce disruptions and to ensure safe and
comfortable place to listen, speak, read, write and study. Murphy and Hallinger
(1985) have identified five pivotal elements of discipline policies and practices
that must be found in effective writing and language arts programme. These
include (1) clearly specified school rules and standards for behaviour (2) rules and
consequences for breaking them which must be communicated to students and
parents (3) consequences which are incremental in nature (4) rules which must be
consistently enforced everywhere in the school campuses (5) regular parents'
contacts and high degree of vigilance on the part of the administrators.
For the instructional focus, administrators must ensure that language arts
curriculum is designed so that objectives and assessment are aligned. The written
60
purpose is shared and understood by all students, staff, school, parents and other
interested community members. Instructional strategies and materials must be
adapted to individual learning needs. Administrators and teachers must enforce a
policy of minimum interruptions of teachers during writing and other language
arts skills instruction (Pink & Liebert, 1987).
Edmonds and Frederickson have in addition reported that school
administrators should give guidance to the faculty in maintaining effective
monitoring system by which students progress will be monitored frequently.
Regular assessment and evaluation will inform administrators and teachers how
students are progressing in their learning achievement. Similarly, regular
evaluation will allow staff to know when reteaching and specific skills
remediation are needed. Different assessment method such as tests (criterion
referenced and non-referenced, teacher-made), samples of students' works and
checklists should be used to acquire needed information to improve writing and
language arts programme.
In order to gain support of parents and community for writing and
language arts programmes, Criscuolo (1985/86) wrote that administrators should
provide avenue to involve parents and community members. This can be
actualized through public relations activities such as: forming a language arts
advisory board which can be made up of parents, teachers and community
members; instituting "Be My Guest"; sending home language arts progress letters
during the school sessions day and making community members aware that the
school will provide help to students who need it. What is being pointed out here is
that good public relations programmes are important. Research has indicated that
the more informed people are about local schools, the more likely they are to
support them.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In this paper, it has been established that although writing used to be
thought of as a tool only in the English language arts areas, enough evidence
abound today to show that writing can serve as an excellent tool for learning in all
aspects of the school curriculum if it is properly planned and effectively
implemented through the dynamic instructional leadership of school
administrators who are especially knowledgeable in language arts programmes.
This is so because they are in a unique position to have significant impact on the
success of the total school activities including the writing and language arts
programme.
Giving instructional leadership and supportive direction in the English
language arts programmes require special effort on the part of school
administrators. The adage that "the blind cannot lead the blind" is particularly
relevant here; therefore it is vital for school administrators to have good
61
knowledge and understanding of the nature of language arts and the writing
process to enable them provide strong instructional leadership in promoting
writing and language arts programmes in their schools.
Would-be administrators, that is those in training can fulfil this
requirement by taking sufficient and appropriate English language arts courses.
Administrators already in the field can obtain further training in English language
arts by going back to the university or by scheduling their time so that they can
attend related conferences and workshops to acquire new insights. They can also
spend some time on reading journals through which they can get new ideas, new
materials and better methods to be shared with classroom teachers for overall
improvement of the English language arts programmes.
Sometimes, school administrators tend to become managers of resources
rather than provide instructional leadership. The priority contemporary society
puts on literacy, however, necessitates that the school administrators be involved
actively in the daily operation of the language arts programmes as a way of
ensuring the total improvement of their schools.
REFERENCES
Criscuolo, N.R (1985/86) Public Relations and Reading Today. Newark:
International Reading Association, 9.
Dyson, A.H. (1988) "The Role of Oral Language in Early Writing Processes."
Research in the Teaching of English. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 1-50.
Fulwiler, T. & Young A. (1982) "Language Connections, Writing & Reading
Across the Curriculum" IL: NCTE.
Gaiy, D. J. (1988): "Writing Across the College Curriculum." Phi Delta Kappan,
Indiana Bloomington, pp. 729-732.
Gerald, C. (1982), Teaching Writing: Essays from the Bay Area Writing Project,
NJ: Baynron/Cook Publishing Inc.
Glatthorn, A.A. (1981) "Writing in the School: Improvement Through Effective
Leadership." NASSP Virginia.
___________(1987) Curriculum Leadership IL: Scott, Foresman & Co.
Maimon E.R (1984) Cultivating the Prose Garden. Phi Delta Kapan. Indiana:
Bloomington, pp. 734-737.
Mayher, J.S. et al. (1983) Learning to Write and Writing to Learn. NJ:
Boynton/Cook Publishing Inc.
Murphy, J. & Hallinger, R (1985) "Effective High School: What are the Common
Characteristics?" NASSP Bulletin, Va., Reston. pp. 18-22.
Myers, J.W. (1984) Writing to Learn Across the Curriculum Phi Delta Kappa
Educational Foundation. Indiana: Bloomington, pp. 7-36.
62
Pink, W.T. & Liebert, R.E. (1987) Reforming Reading Instruction. The Education
Digest Michigan: Ann Arbor, Praklen Publication Inc. pp. 24-27.
Osborn, J. et al (1985) Reading education: foundation for a literate America.
Lexington: Massachusetts, Heath and Co.
Russell, D.R. (1986) Writing across the curriculum in 1913: James Fleming Hosic
on "co-operation". English Journal, 75, pp. 34-37.
Samuels. S.J. & Pearson RD. (1988) Changing school reading programmes:
Principles and case studies Newark: Delaware International Reading
Association.
Sunderman, U. (1985): Holt esl/efl advanced: Connections, writing across
disciplines. Macmillan Publishing Co.
63