| For this research I conducted a case study of a high school earth science teacher. I mentored her as she learned about Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC), and implemented writing-to-learn experiences with her students. I used both case study and action research methodologies, and collected data over one semester. I conducted one formal interview, held weekly conversations, observed forty-four classes, photocopied artifacts, and recorded my ongoing thoughts in a reflective journal. Data analysis occurred simultaneously with the data collection.;An adaptation of Clarke and Hollingsworth's Model of Teacher Professional Growth (2002, p. 961) facilitated my data analysis. The findings indicate that even though this teacher was highly motivated to use writing to help her students learn, a standardized curriculum and end-of-course test limited the number of writing assignments she felt she could include. She did, however, add writing to her curriculum. Practices that facilitated the implementation of writing-to-learn for this teacher included introducing writing tasks in "baby steps," modifying or minimally adding to existing writing assignments, conducting simple, mathematical analyses to confirm that her students were learning, and receiving on-going support from conversations about her experiences and reflections.;The study contributes to research on teacher learning processes, writing in science classes, teacher learning processes with WAC, and the relationship between constructivism and prevalent standardized curricula and testing. Among the implications of the study are suggestions for teachers, literacy specialists, teachers of teacher education courses, in-service providers, and writers of standardized curricula and tests for whom writing to learn is relevant to their pursuits. |
