georgiakarellasportfolio.weebly.comgeorgiakarellasportfolio.weebly.com/.../thesisfinal.docx · Web view2013-04-29 · Prior research has explored John Dewey’s theory of reflective

Running head: WRITING: WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 1

Writing: What is our goal?

Georgia Karellas

Dr. Gentry

May 2013

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT.........................................................................................................................3INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................4METHODOLOGY..............................................................................................................9RESULTS..........................................................................................................................11

Figure 1........................................................................................................................15DISCUSSION....................................................................................................................15CONCLUSION..................................................................................................................19REFERENCES..................................................................................................................20APPENDIX A: MEASURES............................................................................................22

Pre-Intervention Interview...........................................................................................22Post-Intervention Interview.........................................................................................23Writing Checklist.........................................................................................................24

APPENDIX B: STUDENT SAMPLES.............................................................................25Student 1 Samples........................................................................................................25Student 2 Samples........................................................................................................28Student 3 Samples........................................................................................................30

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 3

Abstract

Prior research has explored John Dewey’s theory of reflective practice, which emphasizes the taking in of new information and reflecting upon it to either accept the utility of new concepts or refute them. The current study sought to examine the influence of reflective practice as well as goal setting upon student attitudes and performance in regard to writing. Students across high, middle, and low reading levels were selected. Writing performance was assessed according to what skills each student based his or her goals upon. The development of student attitudes toward writing was assessed by means of a likert scale as well as student perceptions. Non-extensive differences were found among student performance as well as student attitudes toward writing. These results were not consistent with prior research so future research should seek to explore methods for implementation further.

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 4

Introduction

For several decades, educators and other interest groups have asked the question:

What happened to writing instruction and how is this affecting the students of today? It

has been shown that over the years although students do acquire a basic knowledge of

writing skills, only a small percentage of students achieve writing proficiency. (Applebee

& Langer, 2006) Even with increased standards for writing, the National Assessment of

Educational Progress (NAEP) reports that writing performance has remained constant

since 1971 and the gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged groups remain

unchanged. (Applebee & Langer, 2006) In 2010, the National Council of Teachers of

English (NCTE) established the common core state standards (CCSS) with the intention

of increasing instructional focus on language arts and mathematics. (NCTE, 2011) Due to

the gradual decrease in writing instruction, the NCTE believes that through these

standards educators may integrate writing across the curriculum more effectively.

Although these standards are quite new and only implemented by states that

accepted them, their implementation has provided many benefits to teachers as well as

students. These benefits manifest themselves through student involvement in their own

writing. Students reflect, discuss, and analyze their own writing individually and among

peers in addition to receiving feedback from the teacher. Moreover, students are exposed

to a variety of writing assignment lengths and concepts in order to develop strategies.

(NCTE, 2011) Further, it must be recognized that although the how of writing instruction

is important, one must also consider what skills and strategies are being taught.

(Applebee & Langer, 2006) Writing is armed with a variety of uses and forms which as

shown by previous research, students have not been instructed to harness. (Graham &

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 5

Perin, 2007) As a result, students’ lack of writing skills and strategies has hindered their

performance at the college level as well as in the workforce. Therefore, educators must

understand the flexibility as well as the utility of writing in order to make it both

meaningful and instructional.

In order to improve the current status of writing, one must consider the theories

that lead toward skill and strategy acquisition. Prior research has shown that when

students are given the opportunity to create their own avenues for learning, they construct

their own knowledge and apply what they know by creating new meaning as they are

exposed to additional information. The elements through which students create such

knowledge are reflective of the world around them. (Sutinen, 2008) In the context of

writing, students must have the opportunity to acknowledge their prior knowledge and

expand on skills and strategies based on their own analyses.

Further, the constructivist theory of learning extends to the theory of reflective

practice, which emphasizes the taking in of new information and reflecting upon it to

either accept the utility of new concepts or refute them. (Dewey, 1910) In addition, the

importance of this practice is evident in education because it allows students to foster

critical thinking and become facilitators in the process of education. This is different from

the common process of students as the receivers and acceptors of educational concepts as

they are presented. (Dewey, 1910) To prevent this, educators must be able to use and

present alternative strategies in order to inspire reflective and constructive learning.

(Kinsella, 2007) In regard to the writing process, students must be offered the opportunity

to experience alternative avenues of the process. In addition, students must be encouraged

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 6

to use reflection as a foundation for their writing development. This reflective practice

must be emphasized as an ongoing process toward higher-level writing achievement.

Prior research has explored the use of written reflection in the context of subjects

others than language arts as well as in higher education. Variations of reflective practice

have been shown in the context of mathematics instruction. Through the use of math

journals students have been offered the opportunity to connect with the concepts they

have learned while also engaging by way of prior knowledge. (Kostos & Shin, 2010) As

a result, students are able to experience the concepts of mathematics on an individual

level while also sharing and discussing with peers. In order to use such a strategy, time

must be built in so that students may reap the benefits of the practice. (Kostos & Shin,

2010) Further, this strategy can be translated to writing when considering student

reflection on the parts of the writing process. As students learn new concepts of writing,

they may reflect on them as well as their own knowledge in order to gain a deeper

understanding. This understanding may include that of their own strengths and

weaknesses as writers in addition to the utility of writing as a tool. (Applebee & Langer,

2006)

Further, reflection has been proven as a skill that is essential for the success in

higher education. Prior research has shown that when used in higher education, reflection

allows for critical thinking as well as problem solving and engagement among students

studying a specific discipline. (Anderson, 2012) Students were able to engage with the

issues within their discipline through writing and express their own views and solutions.

As a result of its utility in higher education, it is evident that reflection is a practice which

students should be introduced to during the elementary years. Literacy strategies such as

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 7

this have been studied in prior research in regard to social studies. The social studies are a

subject area that students have opinions about. It has been shown that students are able to

express these opinions through literacy strategies and that they should be given the

opportunity to do so. In addition, writing is but one of these strategic tools that allows

students to connect with social studies as well as other content areas. As a result, writing

is cross-curricular and should be practiced as such. (MacPhee & Whitecotton, 2011)

An extension of the writing literacy strategy has previously been introduced in the

realm of dialogue journals used in an elementary social studies classroom. (Camicia &

Read, 2011) During their experience students were able to communicate their beliefs and

ideas about social studies concepts to their teacher through a dialogue journal. This

allowed students to award social studies a significant role in their lives. These journals

also gave a voice to the students as individuals in order to thoroughly explore the

concepts being discussed resulting in a deeper understanding. (Camicia & Read, 2011)

This written expression of the issues also allowed students to practice citizenship within a

democratic context. The ability to express oneself through writing is essential in a

democracy where ideas can only be understood through thoughtful development and

coherent communication skills.

In addition to instructional strategies and models, student attitudes play a major

role in writing acquisition. Some teachers have taken the initiative to understand their

students’ attitudes through quantitative measurements. This has allowed them to

recognize and react to student attitudes about writing, which translated to a positive

impact on attitudes. (Kear, Coffman, McKenna, & Ambrosio, 2000) Moreover, student

attitudes about writing interact with the methods and strategies used by educators when

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 8

teaching writing. It has been shown that positive attitudes toward writing can be sparked

through purposeful or self-enlightening strategies. (Meyer, Fisher, & Pearl, 2007) When

writing is used as a way for students to understand themselves while exploring the

content, it provides an avenue through which positive attitudes may flourish. On the other

hand, when students’ only interact with writing during a scripted testing preparation unit,

they will foster more negative attitudes due to the disconnect between themselves and the

content. In addition, during these scripted experiences, students are not given the

opportunity to see how their teachers engage with the writing process because the

delivery is much more procedural (Tunks, 2010). When considering student attitudes

about writing it is important to recognize that, just as in many aspects of education, they

do not exist in a vacuum. However, it has been shown that student attitudes toward

writing can be affected by different strategies no matter what their prior attitudes may be

(Tunks, 2010).

Prior research has shown the effect of constructivist and reflective theories on

writing performance and student attitudes towards writing. In addition, it is evident that

such research is essential in order to improve the detrimental status of writing

performance as a whole. The purpose of the current research will be to use reflective

practices on the writing process in order to increase writing proficiency and positive

student attitudes. In addition, writing will be implemented cross- curricular with social

studies to provide meaningful opportunities for engagement with the writing process.

Therefore, I hypothesize that positive student attitudes will increase through purposeful

engagement with the writing process. I also hypothesize that writing proficiency will

increase through student reflection on the writing process and individual development.

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 9

The current study will add to previous literature by exploring a more direct cause for

student attitudes as well as how reflection and goal setting affects writing performance as

its own skill.

Method

Participants were recruited based on reading level as well as being in the spring

placement classroom. This was a fourth grade classroom consisting of 24 students 8 of

which had individualized learning plans. The school is located in a suburban area and the

demographics of the classroom reflect this with 5 black/African American, 21 white, and

1 Hispanic. The reading levels in this classroom range from kindergarten through fourth

grade. Although all students completed the tasks, only eight, two across each writing

level, low, middle, and high, were evaluated. Writing level was identified using the

reading level: high, fifth grade and above, middle, approaching fourth grade, low, first

grade, and special education, ranging between first and third grade. Only two from each

writing level group were chosen in order to recognize how the intervention will affect a

varying level of students. In addition, only eight students were chosen in all in order to

better analyze the qualitative data collected. The researcher requested for individuals to

complete journal entries in order to reflect upon their goals for their writing as well as pre

and post assessment interviews. The interviews were administered verbally and audio

recorded for the purpose of better data analysis. Participants were read the informed

consent and assented to their participation in the study by signing. These informed

consent forms, were sent home for the guardians of the selected students to sign.

First, the researcher facilitated and recorded a pre-intervention interview with

each of the students regarding their attitudes and observations of their writing.

WHAT IS OUR GOAL? 10

Participants were presented with questions regarding their organizational and mechanical

writing habits. In addition, students were prompted to rate their attitudes towards writing

on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly dislike) to 6 (strongly like) for which they will

proceed to provide an explanation. The researcher also evaluated a piece of writing

presented by the student according to the criteria checklist in order to match perceptions

with actual performance. In regard to planning, organization, varying sentence structure

and word choice, and reviewing the student received a check as to whether or not he or

she showed this in the journal. In regard to the areas of grammar, spelling, and

punctuation, students who have 0-1 errors will receive a check plus, students who have 2-

3 errors will receive a check, and students who have 4 or more errors will receive a check

minus. The criteria for these three areas changed with the progress of the students.

Each student received a copy of the checklist to glue into his or her writing

journal. At the beginning of each week the students wrote two goals they would like to

achieve in their writing. As a writing task, participants were prompted to reflect on their

indicated weekly writing assignment completed in social studies based on their two goals

written at the beginning of the week. The participants were prompted to complete these

reflections in any form and set two goals for skills, included in the checklist, to focus on

in their next writing, which would be followed up on in the next reflection. This task was

completed once a week over the course of the study, which consisted of six weeks.

Lastly, the researcher facilitated and recorded a post-intervention interview with

each of the six students regarding their attitudes and observations about their writing.

This would be the format would be the same as the pre-intervention interview. The

interview also assessed perceived improvement based on activities completed during the


study. In addition, students completed a final reflection in regard to the strengths and

weaknesses of the intervention in its attempt to aid in their writing development. Further,

the researcher evaluated the students’ last writing assignment using the criteria checklist

as well as the post interview notes and recordings in order to match perceptions with

actual performance.

Results

Over the course of this action research study, I focused on the following questions: Will

writing proficiency increase through student reflection on the writing process? and Will

positive student attitudes increase through purposeful engagement with the writing

process? In order to address these questions, I coded my data by finding themes within

my students’ writing samples as well as in their pre and post intervention interviews. In

regard to writing proficiency, skill themes emerged based on the writing goals set by my

students aligned with their writing samples. For student attitudes, themes emerged based

the students’ rating of their own writing, in addition to their comments during the pre and

post intervention interviews. The following sections will address the themes that emerged

over the course of this study.

Writing ProficiencyThrough the coding of my data, two skill themes arose from the participants’ writing

samples in regard to their writing proficiency. These themes arose as a result of the goals they

decided to set for themselves in order to improve their writing. These themes tell a story of who

the participant is and what level he or she is representing within the content of writing.

The first skill theme that emerged was that of “spelling”. Each of my participants,

regardless of his or her level, identified spelling as a skill to be improved upon within the goals

during at least two of the weeks of intervention.

Examples of these spelling goals include:


Student 1: “This week I will reach my goals by spelling cretley.”

Student 2: “I want to work on spelling.”

Student 3: “This week I will spell words corctly.”

These statements are representative of three different levels of writing proficiency. Student 1

represents the low level, student 2 represents the middle, and student 3 represents the high. It is

evident that regardless of their level, each of these students identified the same area of

improvement. Further, students 1 and 3 unintentionally display their need for this goal, by

misspelling the word “correctly” within their goals. This shows that the students have the ability

to identify and set appropriate goals based on their needs. Students made slight developments

within this theme but did not maintain them throughout the intervention. Samples of students’

writing toward these spelling goals as well as reflections are located in Appendix B.

The other skill theme that emerged within the area of student writing proficiency was that

of “organization”. This skill theme means that each of the students wrote goals that sought to

improve the organization of their writing. When coding, I identified goals for organization by

students’ attempts to re-structure or plan the topics in their writing such as through paragraphs,

number of sentences, or brainstorming.

Examples of these organizational goals include:

Student 1: “This week I will reach my goals by starting new paragraphs.”

Student 2: “This week I will write three sentences in each paragraph.”

Student 3: “This week I will plan my paper before writing.”

Among this skill theme the students represented their writing levels through the depth and

specificity of their goals. My low level representative shows a goal that is organization based but

does not tell how he will form these new paragraphs. My middle level representative organizes by

how much content she will include in each of her topics. My high level representative tells how

she will plan and assess the topic before stepping into the writing. It is evident that the level of


each of the students plays a role in the development and execution of their goals. Students made

strides toward their goals but did not maintain achievements over the course of the intervention.

Samples of students’ writing toward their organizational goals as well as reflections are located in

Appendix B.

Student AttitudesFor the purposes of this study, student attitudes refer to student feelings in regard to their

own writing. Through the coding of student pre and post intervention interviews, one theme that

emerged was that of “utility” or the usefulness of writing as a subject or content. Within this

theme of “utility” I identified two subthemes of which I traced through each of my participating

students. The first subtheme that emerged was that of “improvement”. Within the context of the

pre and post intervention interviews each of the participating students identified the content of

writing as a tool for improvement toward future writing assignments.

Student comments about writing content as a tool for improvement include:

Student 1: “It’s okay, I kind of like it—good for practice for grammar and

spelling.”

Student 2: “I review my writing to make sure I did not make a mistake.”

Student 3: “I feel good about my writing but it needs improvement for me to become an author.”

The second subtheme I identified within the theme of “utility” is that of “expression”.

During the pre and post intervention interviews each of the participating students identified

writing as a means for expression. For the purposes of this study, I coded expression to mean any

reference to communicating feelings, self-representations, or topics of interest to the individual

student.

Student comments regarding the subtheme of expression within the writing content:

Student 1: “I guess it is interesting, the things I write about make it

interesting.”


Student 2: “I like having writing as a subject—I like to be able to

communicate through writing, like with my teacher.”

Student 3: “When I write a story, I get to express myself.”

In addition to the above themes, my students also rated their attitudes toward their writing

on a scale of 1 to 6, 1 being that they strongly dislike their writing and 6 being that they strongly

like their writing. Each of the students rated their attitudes during the pre-intervention interview

and again at the post-intervention interview. An average was taken of the three students’ ratings

from the pre-intervention interview and another average was taken of their ratings from the post-

intervention interview. Figure 1 shows these overall rating averages.

Over the course of my data analysis, I focused on addressing the following questions:

Will writing proficiency increase through student reflection on the writing process? and

Will positive student attitudes increase through purposeful engagement with the writing

process? I coded my data by finding themes within my students’ writing samples as well

as in their pre and post intervention interviews. In regard to writing proficiency, skill

themes of “spelling” and “organization” emerged based on the writing goals set by my

students aligned with their writing samples. For student attitudes, the theme of “utility”

with its subthemes of “improvement” and “expression” emerged based the students’

rating of their own writing, in addition to their comments during the pre and post

intervention interviews. In regard to writing proficiency, the students were able to

identify and set appropriate goals for their writing; however, their improvements were not

maintained throughout the intervention. In addition, student attitudes toward writing did

not increase as a result of this intervention.

Figure 1 Averages of Student Attitude Toward Writing


Pre-Intervention Rating Post-Intervention Rating0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Average Student Attitude Toward Writing

DiscussionOver the course of this action research study, I focused on the following questions: Will

writing proficiency increase through student reflection on the writing process? and Will

positive student attitudes increase through purposeful engagement with the writing

process? Throughout my data analysis I identified themes in order to address the

development of my students’ writing proficiency as well as their attitudes toward writing.

The following sections will address the results identified through these themes,

limitations that challenged this research, in addition to suggestions that will enhance

future research in writing development.

Writing ProficiencyAs the researcher, I conducted a study in order to answer the question: Will

writing proficiency increase through student reflection on the writing process? John

Dewey defines the theory of reflective practice as the taking in of new information and

reflecting upon it to either accept the utility of new concepts or refute them (Dewey,

1910). Prior research has shown significant effects of reflective practice within other

subject areas such as mathematics by enhancing critical thinking within the subject area


(Kostos & Shin, 2010). Therefore, the current study sought to integrate goal setting along

with this reflective practice in order to see if this formula would result in an increase in

writing proficiency among students of varying levels. Three of the eight originally

selected students were chosen as representatives of their writing level group in order to

trace similar skill themes across the different levels.

The two skill themes that emerged from the data across all students were those of

“spelling” and “organization”. Each student attended to each of these skills in their

writing and accurately reflected upon their progress after the assignment. However, as the

weeks continued the students did not maintain their progress from one writing assignment

to the next. As they set new goals to work toward, it seemed they did not value the

progress they had made to build on old progress. Student goals were not related across

the weeks of the study, which may have attributed to the lack of achievement

maintenance; further, hindering their ability toward continued progress. This was true for

all three levels of students.

Having discussed the results within the realm of the students’ writing proficiency,

I will now discuss the limitation of time that presented itself throughout the

implementation of my intervention. Upon entering my fourth grade inclusive classroom,

my students had been instructed using the Lucy Calkins program for writing. This

program discourages the use of prompt writing and is directed toward student’s

opportunity to free write. I was informed that over the course of the year, the time

allowed for the writing block had significantly decreased, so the students did not have

much exposure even to this program of writing. As I began my intervention of weekly

goal setting, practice, and reflective writing with the students I built in a half an hour


before language arts to be dedicated to writing. However, as the rigor of the other

subjects such as math and reading began to set in, it became challenging, even in a class

of two teachers, to discuss writing with students and engage in conferencing to guide and

maintain goals. In addition, due to several snow days, the intervention ended up taking

place over the course of only four weeks which was inconsistent with prior research in

the content of writing (Chohan, 2011).

Although time is an obstacle that inhibits much research, it is essential to harness

it in the context of writing. In a study from 2000, researchers explored a variety of

instructional writing strategies of 11 fifth grade teachers (Lipson, Mosenthal, Daniels, &

Woodside-Jiron, 2000) and discovered that some of these teachers used methods which

allowed students the opportunity to engage with one another about their writing in

addition to conferencing with the teacher. I would suggest that future research looks

toward alternative methods of teaching writing in order maximize the amount of time

students have to engage with their own writing as well as with the writing of others.

Perhaps this engagement will lead to a more conscious record of self-progress over time

opposed to more narrow weekly reflections.

Student Attitudes The second question I chose to investigate throughout this action research was:

Will positive student attitudes increase through purposeful engagement with the writing

process? Prior research has shown that positive student attitudes are fostered by

purposeful or self-enlightening strategies (Meyer, Fisher, & Pearl, 2007). Upon

implementing the intervention of goal setting, practice, and reflections, I also facilitated a

pre-intervention interview as well as a post-intervention interview in order to gather


insight of student attitudes toward writing. I believed that individual engagement with the

writing process would allow for a positive increase in student attitudes toward writing.

However, positive student attitudes were not significantly affected by this individual sort

of engagement as shown by student attitude ratings in Figure 1.

Additionally, themes which emerged in the pre-intervention interview were

similar to those identified in the post-intervention interview. Overall, the representative

students believed that writing has utility among them. This utility is two-fold in that

writing is practiced for the purpose of improvement within the content. Secondly, writing

is practiced for the purpose of expression whether of feelings, communication, or about

topics of interest. As a result, the effect of the intervention on student attitudes toward

writing was non-significant.

For student attitudes, two leading limitations arose of which future research

should take into account. The limitations of time as well as lack of purpose can be

integrated and harnessed in order to make a difference on student attitudes toward

writing. In 2011, Sukhdeep Kaur Chohan conducted a yearlong research study during

which students, teachers, and parents were engaged in a mail program where students

would write letters back and forth throughout the school in order to improve attitudes

toward letter writing and writing proficiency. As a result of this experience, students had

the opportunity to engage with their writing and with others in their school community.

This led to positive student attitudes toward letter writing and individual writing. Future

research should look more closely into this method of using community to add purpose to

the writing process. It is evident that if students are offered the opportunity to use their

writing as a tool for communication, it will allow them a more transparent purpose which


may lead to greater attitudes toward their own writing. Additionally, an opportunity such

as the mailbox program, where students have the ability to exchange letters and

communicate with their teacher as well as with their peers, would allow for a yearlong

experience of engagement during which students would have the time to process their

writing development. This processing time is essential for all students especially those in

an inclusive classroom.

Conclusion

Overall, this study resulted in inconsistent findings with prior research regarding

improvement of writing proficiency and student attitudes toward writing through goal

setting and reflection writing. Future research should look to this study as one to be

expanded upon due to the decline of student performance in the content of writing. By

considering the current limitations of time and purpose, future researchers may have the

opportunity to discover a relationship of goal setting as paired with reflection writing on

writing proficiency and student attitudes. As a result, this study serves as a positive

foundation for future research and its pursuit may lead to more conclusive discoveries in

other diverse classrooms.


References

Anderson, J. (2012). Reflective journals as a tool for auto-ethnographic learning: A case

study of student experiences with individualized sustainability. Journal Of

Geography In Higher Education, 36, 613-623.

doi:10.1080/03098265.2012.692157

Applebee, A. N. & Langer, J. A. (2006). The state of writing instruction in America’s

schools:

What existing data tell us. Albany, NY: Center on English Learning and

Achievement.

Camicia, S. P., & Read, S. (2011). Engaging public issues through dialogue journals: Pre-

service teachers and elementary students read and respond. Social Studies

Research & Practice, 6, 21-34.

Chohan, S. (2011). Any Letter for me? Relationships Between an Elementary School

Letter Writing Program and Student Attitudes, Literacy Achievement, and

Friendship Culture. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(1), 39-50.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Heath & Co. Publishers.

Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent

students. Journal Of Educational Psychology, 99, 445-476. doi:10.1037/0022-

0663.99.3.445

Kear, D. J., Coffman, G. A., McKenna, M. C., & Ambrosio, A. L. (2000). Measuring

attitude toward writing: A new tool for teachers. The Reading Teacher, 54, 10-23.


Kinsella, E. (2007). Embodied reflection and the epistemology of reflective practice.

Journal Of Philosophy Of Education, 41, 395-409. doi:10.1111/j.1467-

9752.2007.00574.x

Kostos, K., & Shin, E. (2010). Using math journals to enhance second graders'

communication of mathematical thinking. Early Childhood Education Journal,

38, 223-231. doi:10.1007/s10643-010-0390-4

Lipson, M. Y., Mosenthal, J., & Daniels, P. (2000). Process writing in the classrooms of

eleven fifth-grade teachers with different orientations to teaching and learning.

Elementary School Journal, 101(2), 209-231.

MacPhee, D. A., & Whitecotton, E. J. (2011). Bringing the “social” back to social

studies: Literacy strategies as tools for understanding history. Social Studies, 102,

263-267. doi:10.1080/00377996.2011.571300

Meyer, J. A., Fisher, B. J., & Pearl, P. S. (2007). Students' perceptions of the value of a

self-study writing assignment. Journal Of Instructional Psychology, 34, 234-241.

National Council of Teachers of English. (2011). Reading and writing across the

curriculum: A policy research brief produced by the national council of teachers

of English. The Council Chronicle,15-18.

Sutinen, A. (2008). Constructivism and education: education as an interpretative

transformational process. Studies In Philosophy & Education, 27, 1-14.

doi:10.1007/s11217-007-9043-5

Tunks, K. W. (2010). Attitudes toward writing in fifth grade students preparing for state-

mandated writing exam. International Journal Of Applied Educational Studies, 8,

1-9.


Appendix A:Measures

Pre Intervention Interview

1. Do you plan out your writing before you begin? (i.e. graphic organizer, brain dump, etc.)

2. How do you go about revising your writing? What areas do you focus on? (i.e. introduction, use of evidence, organization, types of sentences, word choice, conclusion)

3. If you were to edit your paper, what mistakes might you look for? (i.e. grammar, spelling, punctuation, paragraph formation)

4. Do you review your writing when you complete it? Why or why not?

5. When do you like to write and why? If you do not like to write, why not?

6. How do you feel about your writing?

7. What are your thoughts about writing as a whole?

8. How would you rate your feelings toward your own writing?

1 2 3 4 5 6(strongly dislike) (strongly like)


Post Intervention Interview

1. Do you think that setting goals and writing reflections has improved your writing? Why or why not?

2. In what areas do you believe your writing has improved?

3. What areas of writing do you think you still need work?

4. If you could change something about this experience to improve your writing, what would it be and why?

5. How do you feel about your writing?

6. What are your thoughts about writing as a whole?

7. How would you rate your feelings toward your own writing?

1 2 3 4 5 6(strongly dislike) (strongly like)


Writing Check Sheet

+ = 0-1 errors = 2-3 errors

- = 4 or more errors

Planned the paper before writingThe central idea is supported with specific information and examples that persuade the readerWriting is organized in a logical mannerSentences are varied and read smoothlyWord choice develops purpose and toneCorrect grammar is usedWords are spelled correctlyWords are capitalized when appropriateSentences are structured and punctuated correctlyReviewed the paper to make sure intentions are properly reflected


Appendix B: Student SamplesStudent 1: Low Writing Level Representative

Goals:


Writing Sample:


Writing Sample Continued:

Reflection on Goals:


Student 2: Middle Writing Level Representative

Goals:

Writing Sample:





Student 3: High Writing Level Representative

Goals:


Writing Sample:





Documents

georgiakarellasportfolio.weebly.comgeorgiakarellasportfolio.weebly.com/.../thesisfinal.docx · Web view2013-04-29 · Prior research has explored John Dewey’s theory of reflective