ASU Electronic Theses and Dissertations
This collection includes most of the ASU Theses and Dissertations from 2011 to present. ASU Theses and Dissertations are available in downloadable PDF format; however, a small percentage of items are under embargo. Information about the dissertations/theses includes degree information, committee members, an abstract, supporting data or media.
In addition to the electronic theses found in the ASU Digital Repository, ASU Theses and Dissertations can be found in the ASU Library Catalog.
Dissertations and Theses granted by Arizona State University are archived and made available through a joint effort of the ASU Graduate College and the ASU Libraries. For more information or questions about this collection contact or visit the Digital Repository ETD Library Guide or contact the ASU Graduate College at gradformat@asu.edu.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by
Description
My study examined Automated Writing Evaluation tools (AWE) and their role within writing instruction. This examination was framed as a comparison of 4 AWE tools and the different outcomes in the Writing Program Administrators “Outcomes Statement for First Year Composition” (the OS). I also reviewed studies that identify feedback as an effective tool within composition instruction as well as literature related to the growth of AWE and the 2 different ways that these programs are being utilized: to provide scoring and to generate feedback. My research focused on the feedback generating component of AWE and their relationship with helping students to meet the outcomes outlined in the OS. To complete this analysis, I coded the OS, using its outcomes as a reliable indicator of the perspectives of the academic community regarding First Year Composition (FYC). This coding was applied to text associated with two different kinds of feedback related AWEs. Two of the AWE used in this study facilitated human feedback using analytical properties: Writerkey and Eli Review. While the other 2 generated automated feedback: WriteLab and PEG Writing Scholar. I also reviewed instructional documents associated with each AWE and used the coding to compare the features described in each text with the different outcomes in the OS. The most frequently occurring coding from the feedback was related to Rhetorical Knowledge and other outcomes associated with revision, while the most common codes from the instructional documents were associated with feedback and collaboration. My research also revealed none of these AWE were capable of addressing certain outcomes, these were mostly related to activities outside of the actual process of composing, like the act of reading and the various writing mediums.
ContributorsSterling, Chadwick Le Roi (Author) / D'Angelo, Barbara (Thesis advisor) / Maid, Barry (Committee member) / Brumberger, Eva (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
There is a gap between today's scientific advances and their application--between what is known and what is actually being done. This gap occurs because of the process of knowledge translation required to digest research findings for policymakers and practitioners. Studies have repeatedly shown that because of this "know-do" gap, approximately one-half of patients in the United States and Europe are not receiving care according to the most recent scientific evidence. Children are a medically unique and underserved population that stands to be most affected by this gap. Therefore, in this study, the research-practice gap in the pediatric field was calculated and discussed in the context of knowledge brokers, who facilitate opportunities for knowledge translation. Article mentions from the journal Pediatrics were identified in policy documents and analyzed for the years 2010, 2013, and 2016 with the use of the Altmetric platform as a quantitative means of identifying patterns and drawing conclusions about the knowledge translation gap in pediatrics. Altmetric is a bibliometric tool that offers viable insights into the types of impact not covered with traditional methods of citation analysis. The expert policymaking bodies that cited the Pediatrics articles in their policy documents were coded, categorized, and subcategorized to clarify how and where Pediatrics research is ultimately being used to create health policy and to discover whether the gap is similar or different between the various types of policymaking organizations. This allowed the quantitative findings to be nested within a qualitative context. It took a mean of 7.1 years for research to reach the point of policy uptake for practitioners, with a range of 0-32.8 years. There were more international policy mentions than U.S. mentions, but information made its way through the knowledge translation process more quickly in the United States than it did elsewhere. In fact, nearly 40% of articles were cited in policy fewer than five years after original publication. The gap in pediatrics is thus significantly shorter than the 17-year average reported in the literature. However, knowledge brokerage activities performed by technical communicators are continually needed to build links between research, policy applications, and practice.
ContributorsBabiar, Heather (Author) / D'Angelo, Barbara (Thesis advisor) / Brumberger, Eva (Committee member) / Maid, Barry (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018