‘Let me see it through your eyes’: Teaching grammar-for-writing as imaginative embodiment
Literacy, ISSN: 1741-4369
2024
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Effective professional development (PD) in teaching writing involves supporting teachers' knowledge of the writer's craft, including their thinking processes, linguistic knowledge and practical strategies for teaching these. Grammar-for-writing approaches support teachers' knowledge of how grammar creates meaningful effects in writing. While training initiatives support teachers' knowledge of writing processes, more is needed to transfer process knowledge into effective teaching. Synthesising “writerly processes” with grammar-for-writing strategies may support teachers' classroom practice. This article explores the development of a workshop for teachers on a novel imaginative embodiment approach for teaching narrative writing, which links imaginative thinking and linguistic knowledge. The article reports on a study with Year 5 international school teachers in Hong Kong and their perceived efficacy of the approach after trialling it in their classrooms throughout a narrative writing unit, with the purpose of informing future teacher training. Findings from semi-structured interviews showed that teachers perceived imaginative embodiment as supporting their “insider” understanding of writing processes through purposeful and specific strategies resulting in student improvements. However, unfamiliarity with the approach and insecure linguistic subject knowledge resulted in a steep learning curve. It is argued that imaginative embodiment training may develop teachers' understanding of, and strategies for, teaching the link between narrative imagination and grammatical choice, but training should cater to teachers' prior linguistic knowledge.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know