Matching Items (2)
153952-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This study examines the effects of providing persuasive writing and reading comprehension strategy training on source-based essay writing. Strategy training was administered through the use of the Writing Pal and the Interactive Strategy Trainer for Active Reading and Thinking (iSTART). The impact of both individual (writing or reading) and blended

This study examines the effects of providing persuasive writing and reading comprehension strategy training on source-based essay writing. Strategy training was administered through the use of the Writing Pal and the Interactive Strategy Trainer for Active Reading and Thinking (iSTART). The impact of both individual (writing or reading) and blended strategy training on source-based writing was investigated. A total of 261 participants completed the study; after removing incomplete and second language participants the source-based writing and system performance was assessed for 175 participants (n no instruction = 48, n iSTART =41, n Writing Pal =41, n blended =45).

Results indicated that participants who received blended strategy training produced higher quality source-based essays than participants who received only reading comprehension, writing strategy training, or no training. Furthermore, participants who received only reading comprehension or writing strategy training did not produce higher quality source-based essays than participants in the no-training control group. Time on task was investigated as a potential explanation for the results. Neither total time on task nor practice time were predictive of group differences on source-based essay scores. Analyses further suggested that the impact of strategy training does not differ as a function of prior abilities; however, training does seem to impact the relation between prior abilities and source-based essay scores. Specifically, prior writing ability was unrelated to performance for those who received writing training (i.e., Writing Pal and blended conditions), and prior reading ability was unrelated to performance for those received the full dosage of iSTART training. Overall, the findings suggest that when taught in conjunction with one another, reading comprehension and writing strategy training transfers to source-based writing, providing a positive impact on score. Potential changes to the Writing Pal and iSTART to more closely align training with source-based writing are discussed as methods of further increasing the impact of training on source-based writing.
ContributorsWeston Jennifer L (Author) / McNamara, Danielle S. (Thesis advisor) / Connor, Carol M (Committee member) / Glenberg, Arthur M. (Committee member) / Graham, Steve (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
156324-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This project investigated second language writing teachers’ writing assessment literacy by looking at teachers’ practices of electronic writing portfolios (e-WPs), as well as the sources that shape L2 writing teachers’ knowledge of e-WPs in the context of multilingual First-Year Composition (FYC) classrooms. By drawing on Borg’s (2003) theory of teacher

This project investigated second language writing teachers’ writing assessment literacy by looking at teachers’ practices of electronic writing portfolios (e-WPs), as well as the sources that shape L2 writing teachers’ knowledge of e-WPs in the context of multilingual First-Year Composition (FYC) classrooms. By drawing on Borg’s (2003) theory of teacher cognition and Crusan, Plakans, and Gebril’s (2016) definition of assessment literacy, I define L2 teachers’ writing assessment literacy as teachers’ knowledge, beliefs and practices of a particular assessment tool, affected by institutional factors. While teachers are the main practitioners who help students create e-WPs (Hilzensauer & Buchberger, 2009), studies on how teachers actually incorporate e-WPs in classes and what sources may influence teachers’ knowledge of e-WPs, are scant. To fill in this gap, I analyzed data from sixteen teachers’ semi-structured interviews. Course syllabi were also collected to triangulate the interview data. The interview results indicated that 37.5 % of the teachers use departmental e-WPs with the goal of guiding students throughout their writing process. 43.7 % of the teachers do not actively use e-WPs and have students upload their writing projects only to meet the writing program’s requirement at the end of the semester. The remaining 18.7 % use an alternative platform other than the departmental e-WP platform, throughout the semester. Sources influencing teachers’ e-WP knowledge included teachers’ educational and work experience, technical difficulties in the e-WP platform, writing program policies and student reactions. The analysis of the course syllabi confirmed the interview results. Based on the findings, I argue that situated in the context of classroom assessment, institutional factors plus teachers’ insufficient knowledge of e-WPs limit the way teachers communicate with students, whose reactions cause teachers to resist e-WPs. Conversely, teachers’ sufficient knowledge of e-WPs enables them to balance the pressure from the institutional factors, generating positive reactions from the students. Students’ positive reactions encourage teachers to accept the departmental e-WPs or use similar alternative e-WP platforms. Pedagogical implications, limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are reported to conclude the dissertation.
ContributorsWu, Tai-Min (Author) / Matsuda, Paul K (Thesis advisor) / James, Mark A (Committee member) / Smith, Bryan (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018