In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Word Processors and the Developmental Writer: A Teamwork of Tradition and Technology Shelley Ellis Montana State University Current research concerning the intersection of basic writers and word processing is still fresh and novel—and findings therefore remain unsettled—but computer-aided instruction for the classroom , though in its infancy, appears to be significant at all levels of basic composition instruction. However, the literature is replete with complex and often contradictory findings. While one article touts the word processor's ability to entice basic writers into making major, deep revisions, the next essay bemoans "smokescreen" revision , or the tendency to make only surface changes, as the word processor's major downfall; still another piece of research tells us that the traditional linear three-stage model of writing (prewriting, writing, and revision) is gone forever. It does appear, though, that basic writers' attitudes toward composition (particularly revision) improve noticeably when they write with word-processing packages (Gay 63; Hunter 29). Several word-processing functions have a positive impact on the development of writers with special needs. These include the computer 's capability to reduce the physical demands of writing by replacing handwriting with typing; to change the social context of writing by encouraging collaboration on writing projects and publications for a variety of audiences; to promote interaction among teachers, students, and computers throughout the writing process; and to facilitate revision by using spelling checkers. In spite of such paradoxical information, at least one premature idea about the word processor as a writing tool—that it is a "miracle machine" capable of improving student writing independent of other variables—has been thoroughly debunked. Studies continue to show that when left alone, basic writers are not likely to take full advantage of computer technology (Cullen 210; Hunter 14; and Nichols 82). With that caveat in mind, composition instructors at Montana State University, who have for many years used Macintosh word processors to teach Basic Writing 001 (a course designed for a particular population of developmental writers), are rediscovering what they've known since at least 1980: the word processor can sometimes work composition miracles, most specifically (1) when a course 55 56Rocky Mountain Review is designed to enroll a limited number of students who can wordprocess all their writing, from initial clustering and idea-mapping right up to the finished product; and (2) when such a course has at its core a teacher who is conversant with both word processors and some tried-and-true computer-oriented composition strategies. Therefore, as each semester comes to a close at Montana State University, those who teach Basic Writing 001 understand more and more thoroughly that as long as a committed teacher is part of a writing scenario where word processors are readily available for each student, and so long as strong instructional strategies continue to be employed and revised, then the word processor can be a most useful tool for basic writers. However (and often in spite of the importance of instructional design), many who teach basic writers using word processors remain relatively uninformed about the computer-assisted composition strategies that are available to them. Instructors of evolving writers know word processors are useful—but they want to know what will work in their classrooms to empower their developing writers. Salted throughout the available information on teaching inexperienced writers are computer activities that teachers can use, but it takes some concentrated effort to find any kind of definitive "list." What follows, then, is a description of MSU's 001 Basic Writing course, originally designed to ready its students for the freshman writing course, College Writing I, and a compilation of computer strategies which many basic writing instructors will find useful for their own developmental writers. Montana State University defines its basic writers using a variety of descriptors, all or some of which may apply to other groups of basic writers. Students at MSU are often, though not always, lowskilled ; frequently first-generation college; commonly speakers of a native tongue other than English, which they may use in their homes; occasionally learning-disabled; sometimes low-income; and almost always possessors of strong negative attitudes toward writing . However, these descriptors only serve as guidelines; all groups of "basic...

pdf

Share