Research School Network: Cracking the Code of Complex Composition Bridging the Gap: Simplifying Complex Writing Tasks for A‑Level Success

Koons et al found a ​‘notable increase in the complexity of academic writing’, as students move from Key Stage 4 to 5. Too often, they will struggle to write to the standard expected at A Level. Recommendation 4 from the EEF’s guidance report: ​‘Improving Literacy in Secondary School’ helps address this by suggesting we ​‘break down complex writing tasks’, to narrow the academic writing gap.

Deconstructing Models and Scaffolds
Writing complex/​academic arguments, at A‑Level, can be challenging if students do not know what good looks like. We can overcome this issue by ensuring that our students encounter strong models of excellence, exposing them to high quality examples of academic writing.

Whilst a WAGOLL (what a good one looks like) can be invaluable, as a model of excellence, Professor John Hattie (2010) argues that its potential to improve written standards is stifled, unless the model itself is deconstructed.

It is also equally important to understand and respect that the approach we use is likely to differ across subject disciplines and we therefore need to develop the relevant ​‘disciplinary habits of mind’ (Fang, 2012) under a specific subject lens. At Cheslyn Hay Academy, a rural school in South Staffordshire, A‑Level history students are encouraged to deconstruct written models – in lessons – using the following approaches before writing source and non-source essays.

The approach gives students a clear model of excellence but also helps develop the confidence they need to build on the WAGOLL, to develop their written academic style.

Fading Scaffolded Support
Aubin (2022) argues that ​‘scaffolding provides the support required, which is … removed when no longer needed.’ If students become overly reliant on scaffolds, they may never develop the resilience to write independently. Grove (1995) argues that when ​‘we write, we are forced to articulate our ideas in a clear and logical way. We need to choose our words carefully and structure our sentences in a way that conveys our message effectively.’ If we fail to remove scaffolds, we affect not only one’s ability to write in examination situations or at university level, we silence their written voice and ultimately their thinking voice. How then do we reduce our need for scaffolds?

Once certain, perhaps through learning checks, that students have mastered part of the writing process, we can begin to fade support. For instance, if our students have mastered writing a thesis statement, we may no longer support them in their use of sentence starters. We can also encourage metacognitive reflection. In its ​‘Metacognition and Self-Regulated Learning’ (2021) guidance report, the EEF suggests we ​‘explicitly teach pupils how to organise and effectively manage their learning independently’ and therefore build the intrinsic motivation and responsibility in order to become an effective writer. At Cheslyn Hay Academy, A‑Level students are encouraged to work on their academic written skills through spaced retrieval home-study. Through self-testing, students are not only encouraged to test their academic written proficiency in the moment, but also revisit a written skill at a later date to test memory retention and build written resilience and written voice. 

Build Opportunities to Plan, Draft and Edit Writing
Writing is an iterative process. It is through this process that students develop the ability to think, connect and crystalise learning. The need, therefore, to plan, draft and edit academic writing is vital in not only developing written ability, but also curricular knowledge. Sadly, however, little time (if any) is given to editing in the A‑Level classroom. How do we combat this?

We can begin by designing curriculum cycles that deliberately highlight the importance of planning, drafting and editing of academic writing. This idea is explored in the EEF guidance report: Improving Literacy in Secondary Schools, which states that, ​“teachers can break writing down into planning, monitoring and evaluation, and can support students by modelling each step.”

Windsor Academy Trust’s (WAT) have embraced this idea and use this approach to support curriculum and assessment design. WAT focus on 3 phases, and the final phase is, ​‘Review and Response’, which is outlined below.

This aspect of its approach deliberately builds time to address misconceptions and give students the space to improve academic writing. WAT recognises the importance of drafting and editing and ensures time is given over to enable students to make the progress needed. Whilst the process may involve the reintroduction of some scaffolds, it’s ultimately designed to close writing gaps and in ensuring students prioritise editing and revision strategies to improve written quality.

Concluding Thoughts…
Breaking down complex writing tasks is essential for all students, including those in further education. Just as you would with your younger students, fading support and building opportunities for planning, drafting and editing texts is crucial in enabling success when it comes to academic writing.


Our challenge, then, is to see beyond the immediate task to cultivate not just proficient writers, but confident thinkers. In breaking down the complexity of academic writing, we don’t merely improve grades, we unleash student voice, empowering them to devise and articulate their ideas with clarity, conviction and burgeoning intellectual independence that will resonate far beyond the classroom.

Bibliography:

• Aubin, G (2022). ​‘Scaffolding – more than a worksheet’

• EEF (2021). ​‘Improving Literacy in Secondary Schools’. Percipio: London

• Fang, Z (2012). ​‘Language Correlates of Disciplinary Literacy. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1)’, pp 19 – 34

• Grove, A (1995). ​‘High Output Management’

• Hattie J (2010) ​‘Visible Learning’. Routledge

• Koons et al (2015). ​‘Primary and Secondary Textbook Complexity in England’. Meta metrics: USA