This study focuses on a generative AI approach to facilitate qualitative analysis in Writing Studies research. We gathered 13,336 one-sentence to one-paragraph responses written by 3,334 incoming students in a directed self-placement program administered at a large R1 U.S. university. In these responses, students describe their high school writing experience and college writing expectations. In stage one of the project, we pilot the use of Retrieval-Augmented Generation to expedite the selection of relevant responses for a topic—in this case, students’ positive self-assessments as writers. The selected responses were then compared to a random sample and rated by three faculty with writing expertise. In stage two, these faculty generated codes and themes from a subset of the responses, incorporating ChatGPT-4 through the stages of thematic analysis. Results show that the use of AI expedites and enhances qualitative analysis, but human participation in the process is still essential. We suggest a machine-in-the-loop framework with which Writing Studies researchers can more readily integrate generative AI to study large corpora of student writing.

With the emergence of generative artificial intelligence, dialogue systems like chatbots are redefining traditional concepts of authorship and impacting critical aspects of writing. In educational contexts, previous research has pointed out new opportunities associated with using chatbots for writing instruction and support. This study involved 108 students across 10 classes in Norwegian K-12 education, examining how they employed educational chatbots as a support tool in L1 writing assignments. Through an inductive, data-driven thematic analysis of 895 student prompts, five recurring patterns emerged: information requests, structural guidance, example requests, content creation, feedback on text, and follow-up clarification. Aggregated results show that information requests were the most common pattern, particularly among younger students, whereas content creation and feedback on text were more prevalent among secondary and upper secondary students. Illustrative examples from the conversations revealed that generative AI extensively produced content on student’s behalf, even when students primarily sought scaffolding. The study proposes that effective scaffolding of writing through educational chatbots requires not only refining students' prompting strategies but also enhancing system designs that better support pedagogical use of generative AI.

To understand how human readers navigate a literate landscape that newly includes AI-generated prose, we asked participants (n=76) to read and make decisions about who and/or what is responsible for writing anonymized, “ambiguously-authored” texts. Findings suggest that readers’ assumptions about who and/or what wrote a text are rooted in “felt sense.” Prompting participants to make their “felt sense” explicit allowed us to catalog the evidential warrants participants relied on when making authorship decisions. Enabled by a modified grounded theory approach to analysis, we constructed two main themes. First, readers are “triggered” by certain textual cues that, when combined with prior experiences and knowledge, evidentially warrant assumptions about who and/or what wrote a text. Second, after recognizing the consequences of making one’s felt sense explicit, some readers experience what we call an “axiological crisis.” Axiological crises emerge when participants meta-cognitively hear or see themselves attributing certain characteristics and values to an AI text-generator or human author. We conclude by reimagining the axiological crisis as an opportunity for improving metacognitive awareness about how felt sense affects our reading practices.

Linguistic modeling of the writing process has gained in importance in recent years. Existing models, both from a linguistic perspective focusing on syntactic analyses as used in natural language processing and from writing research, are insufficient to actually linguistically explain what authors do when writing and revising. Writing is linear in time, but writers are free to move to any point in the text produced so far whenever they want, thus producing specific parts (e.g., sentences) in a non-linear fashion. However, the final product is a linear sequence of sentences. We therefore can interpret writing texts as a sentence-driven process. In this new framework, this article proposes a model of the production of sentences during writing. This sentence-centric model builds on existing considerations of transforming sequences, bursts and revisions, and takes into account aspects of linearity and non-linearity on the sentence level. We present a working implementation (available as open source software) and show which information can be gained by the resulting analyses in a small case study.

Students need support through intentional writing instruction to develop their discipline-specific writing skills outside of Language Arts. Yet, we argue not all writing instruction provides the same opportunities for student learning. In this study, with the support of professional development, teachers engaged students in civic perspective-taking through writing, focusing on locally relevant public issues. Drawing from disciplinary literacy and genre pedagogy, our research team conducted a descriptive study where thematic analysis was applied to examine second and third graders’ civics writing samples. Our findings indicate that students’ engagement with key civic concepts became more complex and purposeful as they practiced argumentative writing. Development continued from second to third grade in both the sophistication of their civic perspective-taking as well as their writing. Additionally, we found that student motivation to engage in argumentative writing increased in all classrooms across both grade levels when engaging with locally relevant public issues. This article provides details about the elementary civics writing curriculum and the students’ writing outcomes as well as includes the two graphic organizers used in the curriculum.

There is an assumption in education that allowing students to choose their writing topics and positions is beneficial; however, there is little research to support this belief, particularly from the students’ perspectives. In the present study, we conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with students at a large university in the Southwest of the United States after they completed two in-class argumentative writing assignments in a course on exceptional children, one where they chose their writing position and one where they were assigned their writing position. As a group, these 20 students (13 female, 7 male) were above average writers in their first to third year of study, and the majority of them were education majors (70%), followed by arts and sciences (25%), and design and the arts (5%). The interview protocol focused upon their shifting perspectives on the underlying motivational construct of choice related to this and other writing assignments. Taking a grounded theory approach to thematic analysis, findings indicated that having choice in writing was important because it allowed students to write about topics that they find easier, more interesting, and possess greater knowledge. Choice also allowed students to demonstrate their autonomy, which they believed, influenced their motivation and writing quality/grades. While the university students in this study generally preferred choice, a majority of them identified benefits of not choosing, including opportunities to improve writing tenacity, enhance their writing skills, and achieve new perspectives.

This qualitative study examined recounted experiences of nine faculty Academic Writing Fellows who participated in a year-long writing initiative that sought to foster productive academic writing practices. The initiative (including weekly writing groups, national writing mentors in each Fellow’s discipline, and two-weekend writing retreats) was designed to encourage habits and attitudes for successful academic writing through a community-based approach. Using Positioning Theory as an analytical lens, this study explored Fellows’ enactment of rights and duties and their evolving identities as academic writers. Our analyses indicate that the program functioned as a displacement space that allowed Fellows to explore their self-positioning as writers and to re-story themselves in productive ways. We argue that both spatial and temporal displacement contributed to participants’ opportunities for meaningful repositioning.

In this study, we examined how the explicit instructional use of paraphrasing guidelines can help international graduate students who are non-native English speakers to paraphrase information in text sources. This case study involved 14 graduate students enrolled in an academic writing class at a university in the northwest United States. Data were collected through seven sources: a background questionnaire, video of instruction, pretest, posttest, student task documents, stimulated recall interviews, and teacher interviews, which together addressed the three research questions. The data show that the participants’ perceptions of using the guidelines were positive and that their paraphrases in the posttest had improved according to the guidelines. The study concludes that the use of the guidelines should be accompanied by meaningful support through explicit instruction and sufficient practice over time. The implications of this study include recommendations for paraphrasing instruction and future research.

In popularization discourse, insights from academic discourse are recontextualized and reformulated into newsworthy, understandable knowledge for a lay audience. Training in popularization discourse is a relatively new and unexplored research topic. Existing studies in the science communication field suffer from under-utilized baseline assessments and pretests in teaching interventions. This methodological problem leads both to a lack of evidence for claims about student progress and to a gap in knowledge about baseline popularization skills. We draw the topic into the realm of writing research by conducting a baseline assessment of pre-training popularization skills in first-year undergraduate students. Undergraduate science communication texts are analyzed to identify instances of popularization strategies using a coding scheme for text analysis of popularization discourse. The results indicate a lack of genre knowledge in both academic and popularized discourse: textual styles are either too academic or overly popularized; the academic text is misrepresented; and the essential journalistic structure lacking. An educational program in popularization discourse should therefore focus on the genre demands of popularization discourse, awareness of academic writing conventions, the genre change between academic and popularized writing, the role of the student as a writer, and stylistic attributes.

Teachers navigate ongoing accountability pressures that target writing in each content area, yet little is understood about their experiences with or their rationales for integrating writing into content area lessons. While previous research describes writing in U.S. secondary classrooms and explains barriers to writing integration, this study investigates teacher decision making to determine why teachers in various content areas are integrating writing. Using a multicase study design, we explored teacher reflections to discern the reasons why teachers chose to integrate writing frequently. Four teachers, one from each primary content area (mathematics, English language arts, science, social studies), reflected on their writing integration over one quarter. Findings revealed that teachers who integrate writing frequently value the substantial benefits of regular writing for their students. Teachers saw that frequent writing led to students both producing written products more independently and deepening their disciplinary understandings. Teachers also saw benefits to their own pedagogy; specifically, they better understood students’ learning processes and planned more attentively. This research suggests that committing to frequent writing integration can (1) enhance students’ writing and disciplinary knowledge, and (2) enrich teacher knowledge related to supporting students’ writing practices and using writing as a tool for learning in the content areas. Our findings also highlight the complex relationship between teacher beliefs and teacher practice. By looking at the instructional decision making of teachers who integrate writing frequently, we offer guidance on how pre- and in-service teachers might use reflection in and on action to develop a commitment to writing instruction.

This ethnographic case-study examines the impact of asynchronous written feedback comments on the peer feedback process within one doctorate writing group. The doctorate students were interviewed retrospectively about their perceptions of effective feedback comments. Affective components (e.g. hedging devices) and effective components (e.g. revision comments) within the reviewers’ feedback comments, and external components (e.g. reviewer competency) that influence the peer feedback process were induced from the interview transcripts using a grounded theory approach. Further evidence that these identified components impact the feedback process appreciably was triangulated from the analysis of two other datasets; the participants’ asynchronous written feedback comments and revision plans. The results show that the participants used much affect in their written feedback exchanges, and this affect had a strong impact on the effect of their feedback process. Thus, written affective language can play a significant role in how an author interprets and implements feedback comments. This suggests that affect can play a prominent role in helping to develop more effective feedback practices within writing groups. Helping writing communities develop a better understanding of affect within asynchronous written feedback comments can only help them to develop more useful feedback practices.

All writing involves complex linguistic knowledge and thoughtful decision-making. But where do students acquire the linguistic tools needed to write effectively? Many students come from diverse backgrounds and may need additional support and/or instruction in language and grammar. In order to better understand this situation, we conducted a qualitative multiple-case study to examine the experiences of 12 students in a first-year university-level composition course to understand the extent of their diverse learning backgrounds and language needs and expectations. We synthesized information from surveys, interviews, and written texts into narratives about each student's attitudes toward language and writing and also examined the actual language in their texts. The findings reveal wide diversity in linguistic backgrounds and experiences and that students need and want attention to their language skills in first-year writing. Findings further suggest that instructors should consider the backgrounds and abilities of individual student writers and listen carefully to students' perceptions about their own writing and language needs in order to build students' writing self-efficacy levels.

In this study we present a comparative report of two effective instructional programs focused on the improvement of upper-primary students’ writing competence through the promotion of revision skills. Both programs shared the main aim but had two different approaches. We contrasted writer-focused instruction with reader-focused instruction. To provide a valid report on the similarities and differences of the two programs, we applied two complementary dimensions. The first dimension, what the researcher intends students to achieve, provides insight into the types of students’ intermediate learning objectives and how they are sequenced. The second dimension, how to teach, includes the instructional design principles which relate the intermediate learning objectives to the specific learning and instructional activities in certain conditions. We analyse similarities and differences between the instructional programs and discuss the implications of using this kind of reporting system as a useful tool for reporting – and designing – writing interventions.

This qualitative study investigates an approach to mentoring that offers guided practice in authentic disciplinary activities prior to the dissertation stage. The mentoring project under investigation was unique in that it was designed to double as an authentic collaborative research study and as an opportunity for professional development. Starting from the assumption that writing is a function of the activities that underlie it, this article examines the embedded practices out of which writing emerges—namely, the forms of participation taken up by the doctoral student participants during their research and writing, as well as the mentoring practices enacted alongside. Findings show that participants devoted considerable attention to negotiating individual roles and responsibilities throughout the project and to negotiating emerging research objectives in response to a variety of unexpected obstacles posed by the research environment. Additionally, participants encountered significant difficulties constructing claims in the collaborative setting, owing in part to their status as disciplinary newcomers. Findings also show that the design of the collaborative project helped facilitate and distribute mentoring across the diverse research team in productive ways.

This study investigated how struggling adult writers solve a writing task and what they know about writing and themselves as writers. The writing process of the adult writers was examined by combining three elements: the observation of collaborative writing tasks, analyses of their written texts, and structured individual interviews that included both retrospective and prospective parts. This methodical approach provides productive tools to assess writing processes and writing knowledge of struggling adult writers. The triangulation of data from the different sources is visualized in a case study. Findings from the case study suggest both similarities and differences between struggling adult and younger writers. Concerning the writing process of both groups, planning and revision play a limited role. However, alongside these similar limitations in their writing process, struggling adult writers distinguish themselves from their young counterparts through their relatively extensive knowledge about themselves as writers.

This study investigates Grade 12 students’ global and local strategies for writing from the Internet. Analysis of screen captures, think-aloud protocols, and interviews showed two global writing strategies: 1) Students created mediating planning documents; they alternated between researching online and creating mediating planning documents, then drafted a text, and then revised. 2) Students created no (or almost no) mediating documents; they wrote directly from the source documents, alternating frequently between researching, drafting, and revising. Each global strategy comprised several sub-ordinate strategies (e.g., search using a combination of content and rhetorical keywords; take hard copy notes; draft a text out of the sequence in which it appears in the final text; use automatic spelling and grammar checkers to guide review). Some of these strategies are similar to those used in print-based writing from sources. However, using the Internet also resulted in new researching and writing strategies. We argue that writers created task environments and used strategies that maximized the affordances of the Internet, electronic writing medium, and internal cognition, and minimized their constraints. This work extends classical cognitive work on writing as well as more recent work on writing from sources.

Discourse-based interviews (or DBIs) have long been used in writing research to investigate writers’ tacit genre knowledge, including their rhetorical motivations for sentence-level wordings. Meanwhile, researchers in English for Academic and Specific Purposes (EAP/ESP) have used corpus techniques to uncover patterns of such wordings, ones that index community-valued ways of knowing and meaning. This article brings together these two methods in a novel way. By offering a case study of Richard, an advanced undergraduate writer majoring in philosophy at a U.S. university, the article demonstrates how systematic analysis of Richard’s writing informed and enriched DBIs with him and his professor, Maria. Specifically, corpus-based text analysis revealed that Richard regularly expressed an epistemic stance in his course essays in ways that are conventional and valued in philosophical argumentation, while the DBIs revealed that neither Richard nor Maria were consciously aware of these stance patterns, despite regular appearance in both their writing. Taken together, these findings point to the value of using corpus techniques prior to the DBI to identify meaningful choices in language that likely otherwise would be missed. The findings also raise important questions about the acquisition of disciplinary discourses and the sources of knowledge that foster that acquisition.

One hundred and three (N=103) peer review studies contextualized in L2 composition classrooms and published between 1990 and 2015 were reviewed. To categorize constructs in research studies, this researcher used Lai’s (2010) three Ps dimensions (perceptions, process, and product). Perceptions are the beliefs and attitudes of peer review. Process refers to the learning process or implementation procedures of peer review. Product is the learning outcomes of peer review. A thematic analysis of the studies’ constructs showed that perception studies examined learners’ general perceptions/attitudes, Asian students’ perceptions/attitudes (cultural influences), and learner perceptions of peer feedback in comparison to self and/or computerized feedback. Process studies discussed the effects of training, checklists/rubrics, writer-reviewer relationships, the nature of peer feedback, communicative language, timing of teacher feedback on peer feedback, grouping strategies, as well as communicative medium. Product research, on the other hand, investigated peer feedback adoption rates and ratio of peer-influenced revisions, effects of peer review on writers’ revision quality, effects of peer review on reviewers’ gains, and effects of peer review on writers’ self revision. In light of this review, research gaps are identified and suggestions for future research are offered.

This article proposes novel methods for computational rhetorical analysis to analyze the use of citations in a corpus of academic texts. Guided by rhetorical genre theory, our analysis converts texts to graph-theoretic graphs in an attempt to isolate and amplify the predicted patterns of recurring moves that are associated with stable genres of academic writing. We find that our computational method shows promise for reliably detecting and classifying citation moves similar to the results achieved by qualitative researchers coding by hand as done by Karatsolis (this issue). Further, using pairwise comparisons between advisor and advisee texts, valuable applications emerge for automated computational analysis as formative feedback in a mentoring situation.

Writing-to-learn benefits have been explored in various educational settings. However, little research has been done on how a WTL approach in combination with two different languages of instruction can influence historical reasoning learning. The main objective of the present study is to examine the effects of a particular WTL instruction in two languages (L1 is Russian and L2 is English) on historical reasoning learning outcomes. The paper presents the results of a case study of first year students of the History Faculty. Learners received small-group L1/L2 instruction by a team of two teachers in a Logic module which included evidence based direct instruction and a set of WTL activities. The instruction explicitly targeted argumentation skills such as argument structure, validity of an argument, fact vs opinion and using documented historical sources. The Critical Thinking Analytic Rubric was used for both pre and post-course metacognitive competencies assessments while argumentation skills were assessed with the help of a new developed rubric. The results showed various patterns of positive change in all the categories and seem to support the hypothesis that this approach to writing-to-learn in L1 and L2 leads to successful acquisition of disciplinary knowledge and skills.

In today’s workplaces professional communication often involves constructing documents from multiple digital sources—integrating one’s own texts/graphics with ideas based on others’ text/graphics. This article presents a case study of a professional communication designer as he constructs a proposal over several days. Drawing on keystroke and interview data, we map the professional’s overall process, plot the time course of his writing/design, illustrate how he searches for content and switches among optional digital sources, and show how he modifies and reuses others’ content. The case study reveals not only that the professional (1) searches extensively through multiple sources for content and ideas but that he also (2) constructs visual content (charts, graphs, photographs) as well as verbal content, and (3) manages his attention and motivation over this extended task. Since these three activities are not represented in current models of writing, we propose their addition not just to models of communication design, but also to models of writing in general.

This paper focuses on the ways girls use digital environments, like Word, PowerPoint and chatting programmes, for writing and communication purposes. By combining quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis and by adopting a critical discourse framework, we will explore the relationship between girls and new media, especially the ones related to digital writing, in terms of three interconnected variables. The first one is related to the role of the two most important socialisation institutions, home and school, at the present historical juncture, characterised by intense mobility and an expansion of traditional forms of literacy. The strategic choices of the girls’ families and their schools’ teaching practices contributed significantly to the formulation of their digital writing practices. The second variable is gender. Our data clearly show that a substantial number of girls were more inclined than their male peers to use word-processing and presentation software, performing, thus, the school discourses of ‘diligent students’. The third key variable concerns the personality of the girls who filtered in their own unique ways their social experiences, overcame limitations, took initiatives and appropriated technologically-mediated writing media for personally meaningful ends that enhanced their school and/or entertainment Discourses.

Based on explorations of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP), the present paper provides an introduction to the central techniques in corpus analysis, including the creation and examination of word lists, keyword lists, concordances, and cluster lists. It also presents a MICUSP-based case study of the demonstrative pronoun this and the distribution and use of its attended and unattended forms in different disciplinary subsets of the corpus. The paper aims to demonstrate how corpus linguistics and corpus methods can contribute to writing research and provide fruitful insights into student academic writing.

The aim of this study was primarily to investigate the effects of morphological strategies training on students with and without spelling difficulties in English as a foreign language (EFL), but also to assess the feasibility of morphological strategies training in a classroom context. The intervention was piloted in the sixth grade of a Greek primary school: 23 Greek-speaking students, aged 11-12, were assigned to the treatment group receiving explicit teaching on inflectional and derivational morphemic patterns of English words. The control group, composed of 25 Greek-speaking students of the same age, attending a different classroom of the same school, was taught English spelling in a conventional (visual-memory based) way. Both quantitative and qualitative methods were employed to gain insights: a pre- and post-test, an observation schedule, a student questionnaire and a teacher interview. The pre- and post-test results indicated that the metamorphological training yielded specific effects on targeted morpheme patterns. The same results were obtained from a sub-group of nine poor spellers in the treatment group, compared to a sub-group of six poor spellers in the control one. The observation data revealed that the metamorphological training promoted students' active participation and the questionnaire data indicated that students got satisfaction from their training. Finally, interview data highlighted that teachers considered the intervention as a feasible way of improving students' morphological processing skills in spelling.