Embedding writing instruction into subject teaching – how to convince subject teachers?
Ursula Wingate
Department of Education and Professional Studies

What is embedded writing instruction?
Tutors teach writing as part of the subject by
 showing examples of expert and student writing
 making discipline-specific discourses and conventions explicit
 providing constructive/formative feedback on student writing

Subject tutors’ concerns with embedded writing instruction
 I am a subject specialist, but not an expert on writing
 How can I cover subject content when I have to deal with writing issues?
 What are the time and resources implications?

Programme: BA English Language and
Communication
Modules (1 st term):
 Language Learning
 Language and Communication
60 students

1.
Reading and writing
2.
Discussion and writing in class
3.
Explicit teaching of discourse features
4.
Explicit teaching of argumentation
5.
Formative feedback

Three preparatory reading tasks
Notes and summaries to be submitted online
Objectives:
 To develop students’ ability to select and synthesise information from academic texts
 To shift subject content into independent learning
 To provide opportunity for early writing and individual feedback

Reading for Session 1 (2 nd
Oct 2009)
Coleman, J.A. (2009) Why do the British not learn languages: myths and motivation in the
United Kingdom. Language Learning Journal, 37, 1, 111 – 127.
Reading and writing tasks:
Please answer the following questions and submit your answers online:
1.
General question: Which features in this article do you think are typical for academic writing? Please make a list.
2.
Section: ‘Motivation for languages’: Which reason does Coleman suggest for the decline in the study of foreign languages?
3.
Section: ’Politicians and policy’: What does Coleman criticise in Gordon Brown’s 2008 speech to the SSAT?
4.
Section ‘The prevailing social climate and the media’: What causes, in Coleman’s view, British xenophobia and insularity? What role do the media play?
Please submit your answers by 6pm on 30 September 2009.

Method 2: Discussion and writing in class
Group discussions of session’s main concepts/theories
Writing up discussion summary to be submitted online
Objectives:
 To revise/internalise the session topic
 To develop students’ critical thinking and argumentation
 To provide opportunity for early writing and group feedback

Classroom presentation of extracts from journal article to demonstrate:
 evidence base of claims
 discourse conventions [e.g. structure, referencing, hedging]
Objective: To raise students’ awareness of writing conventions in the discipline

Classroom presentation of the structure of arguments (Toulmin et al, 1984).
Objectives: To enable students
 to identify and evaluate arguments in texts
 to build their own arguments

Method 5: Formative assessment
Feedback on online submissions/ exploratory essay
Objective:
 To identify problems early on
 To ‘scaffold’ writing from short pieces to assessed assignments

Learning opportunities through formative assessment
Module 2: ‘Language and Communication ’
Module 1: ‘Language
Learning’
Weeks 1 – 3: Short writing tasks – online feedback
Week 4: Submission of
Exploratory Essay (EE)
Week 5: Individual feedback for
EE
Week 12: Submission of
Assignment 2 (A2)
Week 7: Submission of
Assignment 1 (A1)
Week 10: Grades and individual feedback for
A1

1. Impact
 Did the students perceive the intervention as useful?
 Was there evidence of progress in student texts?
 Was there evidence of students’ enhanced understanding of, and competence in, academic writing?

2. Feasibility
 Could the subject content be covered despite the time that was spent on classroom writing activities?
 Was the workload increase for subject teachers manageable?

1.
Student questionnaires
2.
Analysis of texts/grades
3.
Interviews
4.
Diaries
5.
Teacher notes/discussions

Rank list of instructional methods
Method very useful or useful (%)
1. Exploratory essay
2. Session on referencing and plagiarism
3. Analysing students ’ argument
4. Feedback on online submissions
5. Feedback on exploratory essay
6. Explicit teaching of features of academic writing
7. Submitting summaries/notes online
8. Discussions and writing in class
90
88.1
88.1
88.1
87.5
83.4
76.1
55
9. Presentations on argumentation
(N = 42)
28.6

1. I used the feedback of the exploratory a lot for the next assignment.
Strongly agree
10
(25.6%)
Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly disagree
20
(51.3%)
6
(15.4%)
3
(7.7%)
0
N
39
2. Compared to the start of term, I feel more confident about
my writing.
Strongly agree
2
(5.1%)
Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly disagree
13
(33.3%)
18
(46.2%)
6
(15.4%)
0
N
39
3. The writing instruction has helped me to understand the
requirements of academic writing
Strongly agree
0
Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly disagree
30
(77%)
8
(21%)
1
(2.6%)
0
N
39

I used it [the exploratory essay] a lot, I went back to every comment. That was in my head all the time when I was writing.

Grades A1
Improvement
+ 5% and more
2 Below 40
40 – 52
53 – 66
67 - 80
%
N = 54
11
8
3
44%
Improvements of more than 10%: 14
Deteriorations of more than 10%: 5
Grades A2
No change
+/- 4%
7
6
4
31.5%
Deterioration
-5% and more
2
9
2
24.1%

 Most methods perceived as useful by >
80% of students
 77% felt they understand conventions
 44 % improved grade by more than 5%
(of these, 30 % more than 10%)
 Formative feedback perceived as most effective method by students

 Subject content covered through increased student activity
 Formative feedback creates unrealistic workload (extra resources needed)
 No ‘writing expert’ needed to deliver these methods

 2-hour workshops for King’s nine schools  six agreed, low participation
 Website
 Individual advice

 Embedded approach effective for teaching writing (strongly/agree 100%)
 Would consider to use at least 2 methods in their teaching (strongly/agree 85%)
 Feasible in work context (strongly/agree 39 %)
(49 respondents)
Self-selected sample - wider picture?