de Abreu Malpique Anabela, Valcan Debora, Pino-Pasternak Deborah, Ledger Susan
School of Education, Edith Cowan University, 2 Bradford St, Mount Lawley, WA 6050 Australia.
Faculdade de Psicologia, CICPSI, Alameda da Universidade, 1649-013 Lisbon, Portugal.
Read Writ. 2023;36(1):119-145. doi: 10.1007/s11145-022-10294-2. Epub 2022 May 5.
Providing adequate writing instruction and practice in schools is an essential cornerstone of writing development and it affords a diagnostic approach for teachers. But what writing instruction is being practiced in Australian primary schools? The aim of this study was to survey a sample of teachers (n = 310) about their instructional practices for writing and their preparation and self-efficacy to teach writing. The majority of the teachers surveyed indicated they allocated on average less than three hours per week for writing practice in their classrooms, with findings further showing a large variability in the frequency of writing practice ranging from 15 min to 7.5 h per week. Findings suggested an emphasis placed on teaching foundational skills, such as spelling, over the teaching of process skills, such as planning and revising. Results further indicated that less emphasis is placed on teaching handwriting and typing. The majority of participating teachers reported implementing only six of the 20 different instructional practices included in the survey on a weekly basis, with school-home strategies being the least frequently reported strategies to foster students' writing development. Most teachers expressed positive beliefs about their preparation and self-efficacy for teaching writing. Results from multiple regression analysis showed that preparation and self-efficacy for teaching writing significantly and statistically accounted for variability in using evidence-based practices, teaching foundational skills, and teaching process skills. However, only self-efficacy made a statically significant contribution to predicting strategies to extend writing to the home environment. Implications for teaching and recommendations for research are provided.
在学校提供充足的写作指导和练习是写作能力发展的重要基石，它为教师提供了一种诊断方法。但是澳大利亚的小学正在实施什么样的写作指导呢？本研究的目的是对一组教师样本（n = 310）进行调查，了解他们的写作教学实践以及他们在写作教学方面的准备情况和自我效能感。接受调查的大多数教师表示，他们平均每周在课堂上用于写作练习的时间不到三小时，研究结果进一步显示，写作练习的频率差异很大，从每周15分钟到7.5小时不等。研究结果表明，相较于过程技能（如规划和修改）的教学，更强调基础技能（如拼写）的教学。结果还表明，对手写和打字教学的重视程度较低。大多数参与调查的教师报告称，他们每周仅实施了调查中包含的20种不同教学实践中的六种，家校策略是促进学生写作发展的最不常被报告的策略。大多数教师对自己在写作教学方面的准备情况和自我效能感表达了积极的看法。多元回归分析结果表明，写作教学的准备情况和自我效能感在使用基于证据的实践、基础技能教学和过程技能教学方面的差异中具有显著的统计学意义。然而，只有自我效能感对预测将写作延伸至家庭环境的策略具有显著的统计学贡献。本文提供了教学启示和研究建议。
