Conceptualizing and Measuring Knowledge Change Due to Writing

This article reviews the recent complex and somewhat confus- ing evidence on writing-to-learn and discusses why this lack of clarity exists. It then draws on the field of cognitive psychology to offer a way to reconceptualize how researchers might approach the study of the impact of writing on learning. This reconceptualization involves a modification in both how researchers select writing tasks and condi- tions in writing-to-learn investigations and how they assess the possible knowledge changes due to writing. In the selection of writing tasks and conditions, it is suggested that researchers draw on theories of knowledge change to guide their selections. Four basic theoretical mechanisms potentially related to knowledge change due to writing are discussed. In the measurement of knowledge change, it is argued that writing may more likely influence structural than reproductive as- pects of knowledge. Five methods for assessing structural changes in knowledge due to writing are considered. In the past decade there has been increasing interest by writing re- searchers in what has become called writing-to-learn. Numerous articles have speculated on the important role that writing may play in aiding stu- dents to better understand and learn school related materials. Emig (1977), for example, catalogued the unique correspondences between writing and learning. She noted that by its nature writing forces integra- tion of ideas, requires the establishment of relationships, provides imme- diate and tangible feedback, and forces personal involvement with the material. Odell (1980) noted that writing entails conscious exploration of the information one is writing about and that different kinds of writing necessitate different and often very detailed kinds of conceptual activities. Van Nostrand (1979) observed that composing involves the joining of pieces of information into relationships; consequently by writing about something individuals come to know more than they did before writing. The various activites noted by these authors appear crucial to the very es- sence of learning. In fact, the belief that writing is crucial for learning is a well accepted fact in the education community. Gage (1986) captured this