Reopening Inquiry into Cognitive Processes in Writing-To-Learn

Writing produces generally positive, but inconsistent, effects on learning. The reasons for this inconsistency are unknown. This review examines four hypotheses about writing-to-learn: Writers spontaneously generate knowledge at the point of utterance (Britton, 1980/1982); writers externalize ideas in text, then reread them to generate new inferences (Young and Sullivan, 1984); writers use genre structures to organize relationships among elements of text, and thereby among elements of knowledge (Newell, 1984); and writers set rhetorical goals, then solve content problems to achieve these goals (Bereiter and Scardamalia, 1987; Flower and Hayes, 1980a). These four hypotheses invoke different aspects of writing, and so are mutually compatible. The genre hypothesis has been supported by empirical research; the other three hypotheses have been tentatively supported by research concerning writing-to-learn, or indirectly supported by other research concerning learning or writing. Further investigation is needed concerning: The empirical validity of the four hypotheses, and interactions among the processes that they identify; the declarative and procedural knowledge that underpins writing-to-learn; and the educational effectiveness of applying cognitive strategy instruction to learning through writing.