Research School Network: Goal Setting to Motivate Creative Writers How Do We Solve The Problem Of Motivation? Daisy Holland-Selby continues to investigate.

Writing is challenging. Despite our best efforts with ​‘MADFOREST’ or other similar acronyms to provide students with a framework or a stimulus, these techniques do not combat the problem of the knowledge gap that hinders motivation and the creative process: if a student does not have the schema of language, form, or structure to describe an image, then no matter how evocative it is, they will still struggle to engage in the task.

Instead of this, we might use goal setting and exemplars to improve both self-efficacy and autonomy. Considering the research on models and how providing expert examples offers students a glimpse of what success looks like (Fletcher-Wood, 2018), I thought there was an opportunity to develop a teaching strategy that nurtured the relevant schema by teaching creative writing alongside the reading of extracts from a variety of literary works – what finer models are there?

Similarly to Masse (2016), who compiled a 7 point non flexible criteria on writing like an expert Historian, I wanted my students to be able to identify a series of ​‘sub goals’ for successful creative writing. These sub goals would be established from a series of questions posed about a model extract. Unlike Masse, my goals had to remain flexible, posing a potential challenge for my students because I cannot categorically pin down 7 points that make writing interesting. They may select the right vocabulary, use a variety of sentence forms and structures, but still fail to write a convincing narrative. However, by using a plethora of diverse and challenging literary extracts as models I was hoping to provide what Fletcher Wood (2018) calls an ​‘arsenal of exemplars’ that offers students a taste of what successful writing looks like. The exposure to a broad range of literature and new vocabulary may also act to close the vocabulary gap and strengthen the mental models that will not only help students to improve their creative writing, but also improve literacy across a field of subjects and wider life experiences.

In the first instance I used Daphne du Maurier’s opening of her novel Rebecca and asked students to consider the purpose of descriptive writing by deconstructing the text through live modeling, looking at how she had used language, structure and the motifs of memory, thought, feeling and nature to convey a sinister atmosphere.

Once we had Identified the key components of the extract, we constructed our own sub set of goals, keeping to a limit of three so as not to overload working memory. These were as follows:

1. Opening structured with purpose – short sentence to introduce dream sequence and create ambiguity
2. Movement – Created by the 1^st person narrative voice as she moves through the setting
3. Use of recurring imagery – The repeated descriptions of nature

What followed this was an ​‘emulation’ task where I asked the students to write the opening of a narrative in the same style as the author we had just read.

I can clearly see that they have opened the narrative using the same alluring ambiguity that Du Maurie uses in the model. This student has also emulated the movement of the narrator as they are ​“Advancing through the cast iron gates” which is a technique we discussed in the lesson when commenting on how she uses the narrator’s movement through the setting to develop the descriptions of nature. While this students work is representative of one of the best, I think I can tentatively conclude that some students are starting to recognise that their creative writing could be informed by the broad range of literature they had studied over the years.

There were however some limitations to this approach, I had not provided them with a ​‘non-example’ that could potentially help them identify better the ​‘quality’ I was asking them to produce in their writing. Englemann & Carnine (1991) argue that a single example can’t really communicate the ​‘quality’ that the teacher wants pupils to pick up on. They suggest providing pairs of models – an example and a non-example – to help pupils ​‘see’ the important feature more clearly. If I had provided this contrast in the lessons then there was a possibility some students who were still amotivated, might have been able to more easily identify the successful quality and complete the task.

Therefore, the next time I used the strategy I made some modifications; using the opening of Dracula as my expert model, I also created a non-example.

According to Englemann and Carnine (1991) To show a difference, the non-example and the example are ​‘minimally different’ – except for the ​‘quality’ that the teacher wants the students to attend to. In this particular case we were looking at the diary form and effective adverbs and adjectives to establish both narrative voice and setting. Once the students had considered which one was the better piece of writing, we discussed how authorial use of the omitted words helps to create character voice and thus why choice of vocabulary is important in creating character. This discussion drew us to our three sub goals for this lesson:

1. Use of short/​minor sentences to introduce date/​month and time
2. Use of noun phrases to develop description
3. Attempt to use new vocabulary to establish the ​‘well-spoken’ character voice.

The above is representative of some of the stronger emulations. Here I can clearly see where the student is using the sub goals and new vocabulary in his creative writing. He has opened with the short sentences that introduce date and setting. There are several places he has used new vocabulary and interestingly within differing contexts to its original use. For example, where he has described the ​“smatter of rain” rather than a ​“smattering of German” from the original text. This is very much the outcome I had desired – students being able to adapt what they have read to their own creative interpretations and thus see how they too can be successful creative writers. I do think that breaking down the writing into sub goals has helped and in the student responses it is clear that they are trying to meet this requirement. One caveat of this approach, as we can see from the above response, is that some important skills might not be addressed in a particular lesson. I can see from the above example that a weakness of this student is grammatical accuracy when using capital letters. However, a positive regarding this approach is that the student knows he has been successful in achieving the sub goals for this lesson, but I can use this analysis in my planning for the next writing session to focus on an extract that can address this particular gap in knowledge.

Overall, the outcomes were positive and I’m hopeful that over time, as we work through our arsenal of exemplars, that my students’ mental models will strengthen and they will become confident writers, drawing on their knowledge of what good writing look like.

Daisy Holland-Selby is Assistant Vice Principal at Dixons Allerton Academy. She is also an Evidence Lead for Dixons Academies Trust, focusing on the evidence around cognitive science.