Historically reading and writing were disconnected in education. In the 1950s and 1960s, they were taught as separate
components of a subject-centered curriculum in the school systems in the United
States (Nelson & Calfee, 1998). Research
work on the reading-writing connection was scarce. In the 1970s and 1980s, researchers and educators were
curious of the impact of the relationship between reading and writing.
The 1980s marked a definite shift in focus toward examining reading and
writing as processes (Tierney, 1992). Most
of the studies that examined the reading-writing connection were
conducted throughout the 1980's and into the early 1990s. These studies appeared in a wide
variety of journals and came from several different disciplines with education
and psychology being the most prominent. The
research of the relationship of reading and writing revealed that when reading
and writing occurred together in collaboration, then both thinking and learning
were enhanced. In other words, reading is connected to writing and reading and
writing work in synergy (Tierney, 1992).
Stotsky (1983)
published a review of correlational and experimental research studies that
examined the influence of reading and writing
relationships. Her synthesis spans
about 50 years, from the beginning of 1930s to 1981.
Studies correlational to that time showed that better readers tended to
be better writers and that better writers read more than poor writers, and
better readers produce more syntactically mature writing than poor readers.
From the research studies, correlational studies presented consistent
results of a significant correlation between reading and writing.
The reading experience seems to be consistent correlation of, or
influence on writing ability.
A few studies
have examined the reading-writing connection in a more comprehensive,
developmental manner. Eckhoff
(1983) questions the influence of children's reading on their writing
development. She explores the
possible effects of children's reading on their writing.
The study hypothesized that the linguistic structure, format, and style
of a basal reader would have an impact on children's writing due to the fact
that children read these texts more often than other kinds of literature.
The study found a correlation between the text read and the children's
writing ability. The linguistic
complexity of the sentence structures found in one series text predominantly
occurred in the children's writing when reading that series.
Barrs (2000) study
questions the influence of children's reading of literature on their writing
development. The study's purpose
was to focus on children's writing development when reading challenging
literature, to investigate if teaching strategies were effective in teaching
writing, and to note whether specific texts had an impact on children's
learning writing. The study results
found that there couldn't be any significant writing development without
reading development or reading development without writing development.
The project presents the value of focusing on texts in more depth and
detail, rereading, and giving ample time for writing.
The students were introduced to challenging texts which influenced their
interest in more demanding literature.
Two related studies
support reading influencing writing when composing from sources. Spivey &
King (1989) focused their study on discourse synthesis, where readers/writers
select, organize, and connect content from source texts as they compose their
own text. This study's purpose
was to examine the differences in students' performance on a report-writing
task that required students to gather information from source texts.
The study examines how the developmental patterns differed across three
grade levels and how students of different reading abilities at those grade
levels make use of sources to write their own informational reports.
The study focused on the textual evidence of selecting, organizing,
connecting, and the overall quality of the text.
Three questions guided the study: (1) On what basis do readers/writers
make selections for their synthesis? (2) How do readers/writers organize the
content they select? and (3) How successful are readers/writers at transforming
the source content into their own connected discourse? The study results revealed differences according to reading
ability and grade level in the overall quality of the reports.
The general reading ability and achievement in synthesis overlapped to a
greater degree. When composing from
sources, the student becomes the reader/writer, who is involved in the reading
and writing process that is interconnected making it difficult to distinguish
what is being done for the purpose of either reading or writing.
In another related
study, McGinley (1992) investigated the role of reading and writing while
composing from sources. The primary
purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the discourse synthesis
process, which is defined as composing a text from more than a single source,
which is a goal-directed, linear process. This study had four goals: (1) to provide descriptions over
time of the complex processes involved in composing a text from multiple
sources; (2) to explore the similarities and differences in the ways that two
students coordinated their reading, writing, and reasoning activities during a
composing from source activity; (3) to investigate how different reading and
writing activities functioned for students during this process; and (4) to
examine how the differential coordination of reading, writing, and reasoning
activities were related to differences in students' conceptual processes and
their written products. The study
was divided into two parts: the first part focused on how various reading and
writing activities interacted over time and the second part selected two of the
seven students in the study for a more detailed analysis to examine more closely
the ways in which individual learners differed in their abilities to coordinate
the reading and writing activities they were engaged in during the process of
composing from source. The results
of the study indicated that different reading and writing activities found
functioned in unique yet partially overlapping ways during the process of
composing from source. The
relationship that existed with the reading and writing activities in which
students' were engaged influenced and was influenced by other activities in a
network of mutual support. In other
words, analysis of the protocols revealed that students' purposes throughout
the task had a direct influence on the specific type and number of reading and
writing activities that the students used in order to accomplish those specific
purposes.
In a set of two
related studies, Taylor & Beach (1984) focused on the text structure
instruction on students' comprehension and production of expository text.
This study assessed the effects of instruction that focused on text
structure in reading on junior high students' comprehension and memory for
content area textbook material. The
study examined the effects of this instruction on the quality of students'
exposition writing. Based on the findings of this study, the reading study
strategy enhanced students' recall for relatively unfamiliar social studies
reading material and had a positive effect on the quality of students'
expository writing.
Crowhurst
(1991) conducted a similar study in which examined students' poor performance
in the writing of persuasive discourse and the reading-writing relationship. The
study's purpose was to determine whether the writing of persuasive discourse
could be improved by instruction and the effect of reading on writing and of
writing on reading within the mode of persuasion. The study investigated three questions: (1) Can sixth
graders' ability to write persuasion be improved by instruction? (2) Will
instruction and practice reading persuasive discourse improve the writing of
persuasion ? and, (3) Will instruction and practice of writing persuasive
discourse improve the reading of persuasion?
In addressing the three research questions, the first concerning the
teachability of persuasive writing, the study found that both the writing group
and reading group improved significantly on the writing quality from pretest to
posttest compared to the control group. Since
there were no initial differences between the reading group and writing group
compared to the control group in the pretest, the posttest differences must be
attributed to instruction in persuasive discourse.
The second question concerning reading persuasive discourse to improve
writing, the study found a significant improvement in the writing quality,
organization, use of conclusion and text markers, and elaboration of writing in
the reading group compared to the writing group and control group.
The third question concerning writing persuasive discourse to improve
reading, the study found no support for the reading/writing relationship.
In conclusion, the reading group's reading of persuasive discourse
played a significant role in the improvement of writing and the instruction of
the persuasive model helped in the development of a schema for persuasion which
were evident in the students' written compositions. The study's results revealed the fact that students
transferred knowledge gained in reading and instruction in
persuasive writing led to significant improvements in writing compositions
should be taken as evidence for the more general idea that reading affects
writing.
In another
study, Shanahan (1984) conduct an exploratory analysis of the relationship of
learning to read and write. The
reading-writing relationship is compared between grade levels (second and fifth)
and achievement levels (beginning readers and advanced readers).
Multiple reading and writing measures were administered over a five-week
period. The results found that
reading and writing were significantly related at both the second and fifth
grade levels. However, there were
significant differences in the findings across the reading level group that
suggests that the reading-writing relationship changes with reading development.
Employing a similar
approach, Shanahan & Lomax (1986) compared and evaluated three theoretical
models of the relationship of learning to read and write.
The models were evaluated on the basis of their ability to account for
the relationships found in reading and writing data collected from second and
fifth graders. The three
theoretical models were identical in the components of reading and writing;
however, how information was transferred across reading and writing varies.
The first model was the interactive model where reading can influence writing and writing
can influence reading; the second model was the reading-to-writing model where reading knowledge can influence
writing but no writing can influence reading; and the third model was the writing-to-reading
model where writing influences reading, but reading doesn't influence
writing. The results indicated that
the interactive model provided the best description of the reading-writing
relationship with second and fifth graders.
The reading-to-writing model was superior to the writing-to-reading model
suggesting a greater amount of knowledge transfer from reading to writing.
From this finding, it was reasonable to infer that the traditional
approach, that is learning reading before writing was unnecessarily inefficient.
A disconnected approach to reading and writing fails to take advantage of
the knowledge sharing opportunities a student can experience when reading and
writing are integrated. Overall,
the benefits of combining reading and writing were apparent in this finding.
In an additional
study by Shanahan & Lomax (1988) extends Shanahan and Lomax's (1986)
previous research by describing and analyzing the three theoretical models of
the reading-writing relationship. This
study used the same three theoretical models of reading-writing relationship,
but the subjects were arranged by reading level rather than by grade level. This study's purpose was to describe the importance and
orders of the relationships rather than to attempt to delineate the components
parts of the relations that were found. The
results revealed when comparing the three theoretical models of the
reading-writing relationship, the interactive model was found to be most valid.
It was superior to the reading-to-writing model and equal to the
writing-to-reading model with the beginning reader.
The interactive model was clearly superior to both models with the
proficient reader. The importance
of reading knowledge in writing and writing knowledge in reading was apparent in
this finding. In other words,
reading influences writing and writing influences reading.
Tierney & Soter
et al. (1989) conducted a study on the effects of reading and writing upon
thinking critically. The study
examined the effects of writing, reading, and answering questions both
separately and in combination with one another.
This study questioned whether writing in combination with reading prompts
more critical thinking than reading or writing done separately, or in
combination with questions or a knowledge activation activity. The study examined the amount and type of reading that
learners engage in as they read, as they write, or as they both read and write.
The study revealed that the students who read and wrote were engaged in a
great deal more evaluative thinking and perspective shifting than those who just
wrote or those who just read. The
thinking readers and writers engaged in as they read and wrote.
Also, reading and writing in combination contributed to a wide range of
revisions and to higher quality of drafts than writing alone.
The study presented a view of reading and writing working together for
goals, which transcend either just reading and writing for their own ends.
The study supported the view that reading and writing in combination have
the potential to contribute in powerful ways to thinking.