Project Background:

My theoretical perspective as well as my qualitative research methods can be identified with those who have applied the perspective of New Literacy Studies (NLS) to adult writers in higher education (e.g. Clark and Ivanic, Lillis, and Lytle). NLS draws upon work in literary theory, anthropology, linguistics, education and psychology, including theorists such as Lev Vygotsky and Mikhail Bakhtin as well as critical educators such as Paulo Freire and bell hooks (Gee, Street).

The significance of prior experience is one of the central themes in discussions of adult students (Brookfield, Knowles, Kolb). However, most composition scholarship that discusses prior experience focuses on having adults write about their life experiences (e.g. Fox, Uehling). Most considerations of prior writing experience focus on how past negative experiences with writing produce anxiety in adult writers (e.g. Fredericksen, Summer). Only a few researchers have looked at how prior writing experiences shape the decisions adult students make about organization and development in their academic writing (e.g. Gilliam, Popken). Because adult students do not stop engaging in nonacademic writing when they come to school and because workplace writing, in particular, continues to motivate and influence their approach to academic writing, I will investigate how students’ work, personal and academic writing influence each other.

Just as the impact of adults’ prior and out of school writing experiences has not been sufficiently investigated, research on feedback is almost entirely based upon students who go to college immediately after high school (e.g. Sommers). Because adult students are both more anxious and more motivated than their younger counterparts (Summer, Kolb, Brookfield), we can assume that, but do not know if, they experience and respond to feedback on their writing differently than younger students.

Time Frame: September 2008 -- August 2009

Research Question or Hypothesis:

At least forty percent of students taking college composition are 25 years or older (“Postsecondary”). However, rhetoric and composition scholars have done little research on the unique needs, strengths and processes of returning adult writers. More attention has been paid to adult writing in the education field. In both fields, most of the research on adult writing focuses on how to teach basic skills. To contribute to the needed research on adult writing students, I will focus on these central questions:

1. How do previous academic writing experiences and current on-the-job and personal writing influence the ways adult college students structure essays, paragraphs, sentences; develop and support claims; and go about the process of writing?

2. How do adult college students academic writing experiences influence they ways in which they structure documents, paragraphs, sentences; develop and support claims; and go about the process of writing in their business and personal lives?

3. Do adult college students experience feedback on their writing differently than younger students?

4. What are the most productive kinds of feedback to help adult college students develop as writers?

General Research Approach: Qualitative

Participants and Setting: Students at the School for New Learning and community college faculty from across the country.

Research Methods:

The SNL study is focused on proof of concept – that adult students of average abilities differ in how they develop their writing skills from younger undergraduates. Thus, the SNL study sample will be purposive rather than random. I will focus on twelve to twenty adult students writing at the college level who provide a balanced sample of male and female and weak, average and strong writers at the start, middle and end of their studies at SNL. I specify gender and writing ability because previous studies of adult students have disagreed about the effect of gender and insufficiently considered a range of writing abilities. To take into account the diversity of adult students, the community college study will seek to test the conclusions of the SNL study by sampling for maximum variation in demographics and writing experience among adult, college-level writers. I will survey and collect case studies from community college teachers across the country on the same set of research questions I addressed in the SNL study. I will then conduct cross case analysis on the data.

For the SNL study, I will use a think-aloud protocol, writing diaries, textual analysis and interviews to analyze the students’ writing and writing processes. Think-aloud protocols were first used in composition research by Emig in her 1971 study on “The Composing Process of Twelfth Graders” and since have been most closely associated with the work of Flower and Hayes on the cognitive processes involved in the writing process. In this method, students are asked to verbalize their thoughts as they work through a writing project. Writing diaries provide a similar way to capture a student’s thought processes while working through a writing project when the researcher is not present. I will use the think-aloud protocol and the writing diaries with the academic, work and personal writing of each student to compare their processes in these different settings. My textual analysis of student writing will build upon the work of Gillam, Popken and Sommers, looking at patterns of structuring essays, paragraphs and sentences; methods of making and supporting claims; and how students respond to feedback. For this textual analysis, I will ask students for notes, drafts, feedback and documents written for school, work and personal reasons during one quarter. In interviews, I will borrow and extend Theresa Lillis’s talk back method to structure discussions with students about samples of their writing as well as their writing processes. My data analysis will be ongoing and iterative and use the process of data reduction, data display, conclusion drawing and verification described by Miles and Huberman.The SNL study is focused on proof of concept – that adult students of average abilities differ in how they develop their writing skills from younger undergraduates. Thus, the SNL study sample will be purposive rather than random. I will focus on twelve to twenty adult students writing at the college level who provide a balanced sample of male and female and weak, average and strong writers at the start, middle and end of their studies at SNL. I specify gender and writing ability because previous studies of adult students have disagreed about the effect of gender and insufficiently considered a range of writing abilities. To take into account the diversity of adult students, the community college study will seek to test the conclusions of the SNL study by sampling for maximum variation in demographics and writing experience among adult, college-level writers. I will survey and collect case studies from community college teachers across the country on the same set of research questions I addressed in the SNL study. I will then conduct cross case analysis on the data.

For the SNL study, I will use a think-aloud protocol, writing diaries, textual analysis and interviews to analyze the students’ writing and writing processes. Think-aloud protocols were first used in composition research by Emig in her 1971 study on “The Composing Process of Twelfth Graders” and since have been most closely associated with the work of Flower and Hayes on the cognitive processes involved in the writing process. In this method, students are asked to verbalize their thoughts as they work through a writing project. Writing diaries provide a similar way to capture a student’s thought processes while working through a writing project when the researcher is not present. I will use the think-aloud protocol and the writing diaries with the academic, work and personal writing of each student to compare their processes in these different settings. My textual analysis of student writing will build upon the work of Gillam, Popken and Sommers, looking at patterns of structuring essays, paragraphs and sentences; methods of making and supporting claims; and how students respond to feedback. For this textual analysis, I will ask students for notes, drafts, feedback and documents written for school, work and personal reasons during one quarter. In interviews, I will borrow and extend Theresa Lillis’s talk back method to structure discussions with students about samples of their writing as well as their writing processes. My data analysis will be ongoing and iterative and use the process of data reduction, data display, conclusion drawing and verification described by Miles and Huberman.

Funding: I have a leave from DePaul University.

Intended Audience: College composition teachers.

Results Available: View Results File (above)