REACHING THE CHILD LEFT BEHIND: MOTIVATING THE RETAINED
STUDENT
Except where reference is made to the work of others, the work described in this thesis is
my own or was done in collaboration with my advisor. This thesis does not include
proprietary or classified information.
Joanie C Blanks
Certificate of Approval:
__________________________
Donald R. Livingston, Ed.D.
Co-Project Advisor
Education Department
________________________
Sharon M. Livingston, Ph.D.
Co-Project Advisor
Education Department
Motivating the Retained Student
REACHING THE CHILD LEFT BEHIND: MOTIVATING THE RETAINED
STUDENT
A project submitted
by
Joanie Blanks
to
LaGrange College
in partial fulfillment of
the requirement for the
degree of
SPECIALIST IN EDUCATION
in
Curriculum and Instruction
LaGrange, Georgia
June 28, 2011
ii
Motivating the Retained Student
iii
Abstract
Motivation is always a factor at the middle school age, especially for those
students who have been retained; they are experiencing frustrations of repeating
something at which they were unsuccessful. Even though rapport between students and
teachers is the first step to motivation at this age, innovative methods are always desired
to motivate students to learn. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness
of using word processors to teach writing. Although the research showed using the
Microsoft word processor to teach writing did not develop advanced writing skills, the
study did confirm it could assist the struggling writer.
Motivating the Retained Student
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………..iii
Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………iv
List of Tables …………………………………………………………………..…………v
Chapter 1: Introduction……………………………………………………………………1
Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………….1
Significance of the Problem…………………………………………………….....2
Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks…………………………………………5
Focus Questions………….………………………………………………………..8
Overview of Methodology…...……………………………………………………9
Human as Researcher………………...………………………………………......10
Chapter 2 Review of the Literature………………………………………………………12
Affect of the Word Processor on Students’ Writing Ability ……………………13
Using the Word Processor as a Motivational Strategy…………………........….18
School Improvement Focus ..……………………………………………………20
Chapter 3: Methodology…………………………………………………………………24
Research Design……………………………………………………………….…24
Setting……………………………………………………………………………25
Subjects, Participants………………………………………………………..…..26
Procedure and Data Collection Methods………………………………………...26
Validity, Reliability, Dependability, Bias ……………......…………………..….29
Analysis of Data…………………….…………………………………………....31
Chapter 4: Results..………………………………………………………………………36
Chapter 5:Analysis and Discussion of Results…....………………………………….….48
Analysis……………………………………………………………………….....48
Discussion……………………………………………………………………..…60
Implications……………………………………………………………………...64
Impact on School Improvement………………………..…………..………….…65
Recommendations for Future Research…………………………………………67
References……………………………………………………………………………….69
Appendices………………………………………………………………………………73
Motivating the Retained Student
List of Tables
Tables
3.1 Data Shell ……………………………………………………………..……………27
4.1 Independent-t test Results for writing scores (8.5-2009-10)…………………….…36
4.2 Independent-t test Results for writing scores (8.5-2009-10)……………….………37
4.3 Chi Square Statistics for Survey questions…………………………………….…...40
v
Motivating the Retained Student
1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
There is an increased need for proficient written communication skills in our
technology driven society. We are now identified mostly by our thoughts and proposed
ideas through the written word. In the job market face-to-face meetings have been
replaced with concise communications through modern technology. Email has become
the major form of communication in departments and businesses. According to the
Graham and Perin (2007), to prepare for college and the modern workplace, middle and
high school students will need to write extensively. The article also explained how
managerial and professional jobs have always required some amount of writing, but that
requirement now extends to all areas of the workforce. Nevertheless, few students have
the writing proficiency the job market demands.
In today’s technological world, we, as educators, recognize the need for teaching
writing skills; therefore, we must devote the necessary class time. But we also know that
writing is an extremely complicated activity that requires a lot of practice to master these
skills. Writing skills extend far beyond grammar, punctuation, and spelling, however our
intelligence is often judged by our written words. Educators agree that word-processing
programs are desirable to teach these skills and are easily accessed.
In a Pearson study conducted by Way, Davis and Strain-Seymour (2008), the
inconsistency with teaching writing using paper and pen with today’s demands for the
use of word processors was examined. The study showed the significance of using word
processors to teach writing to prepare students for their future. While educators claim to
Motivating the Retained Student
2
be preparing students for the “real world” many do not utilize word processors to teach
writing because of the availability of computers.
In conjunction with developing the ability to communicate effectively in writing,
the classroom teacher also has an overwhelming task of increasing motivation. When
attempting to motivate students to write it is essential that writing is perceived as
appealing and applicable to life. This certainly could be challenging when considering
struggling students who are often the ones retained. The retained student has not
experienced much success therefore not only lacks motivation but self-esteem or selfefficacy as well. Motivation is identified as a major component to the success of a
student. In examining students’ motivation to write, Cordaro (2009) refers to selfperception as self-efficacy. Cordaro relates the students’ abilities to write to their belief
they can handle the complexities of writing.
Although many strategies of effective ways to teach writing exist, teachers are
continually searching for new and innovative methods to give students the confidence to
become good writers. While teachers encourage students to seek improvement in their
writing, students must make this connection in order to become successful adults.
Significance of the Problem
Producing proficient writers in today’s classroom is a significant challenge. The
report from the National Commission on Writing for America’s Schools, and Colleges
(2003) examined the role of writing in the classroom and in the workplace. It concluded
that the ability to write well has never been more important. In today’s technological
economy, more people than ever before are required to use the written word, as a result
Motivating the Retained Student
3
writing continues to be an area in need of constant attention. Even people who do not
consider themselves writers understand the importance of writing to their careers.
Teachers and parents desire the highest education possible for every student.
Whether it is college or technical school, adults are aware the key to employment security
is some form of higher education. Three quarters of American students enroll in
institutions of higher education immediately after graduation from high school. With the
addition of the writing section to the SAT, writing is now the key to opening the doors for
enrollment to many colleges. While many fields of employment emphasize the written
skills of documents, writing is the most valuable quality an applicant can offer.
According to Graham and Perin (2007), businesses collectively spend $3.1 billion
annually for writing remediation (p.331).
Time constraints are one of the factors that has affected the teaching of writing in
today’s classrooms. Research papers, that once played a major role in determining a
students’ stage of writing, are now usually assigned once a year because of lack of time
teachers have to grade them. Feedback, that must be effective and timely, is essential in
guiding a student as a writer. With many time constrictions and state standards to meet,
writing in the classroom is often limited and not as thoroughly covered as teachers would
like. Emphasis is mostly on assessment and planning around test scores. Findings from
the National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges (2003) indicates
that despite the neglect of writing instruction, it would be false to claim that most
students cannot write, rather most students cannot write well.
According to the Georgia Department of Education’s (n.d.) website, that
publishes writing score results for the entire state yearly, 79 percent of all Georgian
Motivating the Retained Student
4
students in 2010 achieved the “Meets” or “Exceeds” standard set for writing, a 4percentage point increase over 2009. However the 2009-2010 Georgia Department of
Education Strategic Plan’s target for eighth grade writing was 82 percent of students to
meet or exceed standards. The Georgia Department of Education explains the Grade 8
writing Assessment provides predictive information to eighth graders about their future
writing performance in advance of taking the Georgia High School Writing Test. The
state’s target was not met by the 2009-2010 eighth grade students, which incidentally
includes subjects involved in this study.
The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of the strategies
implemented using word processors to increase students’ abilities in writing proficiently
because many other curricular subject areas are dependent on effective writing skills. The
use of the word processor can advance both teaching and learning of writing. Fairly
simple programs already exist and can improve ways to revise text while self-editing for
grammar, spelling and punctuation.
Although using word processors cannot develop advanced writing skills in
students, it can increase students’ motivation to write more often. For teachers, the use of
word processors can provide opportunities for timely feedback as well as easing the task
of assessing students’ writing. Technology has transformed most homes and is readily
available for the use of today’s students. Because of the availability and familiarity with
computers, little or no tutorials on using the word processor were expected to be
necessary. Surprisingly, students are rarely allowed to use computers for writing
assignments in school. Therefore, by students being allowed to use the word processors
to write, an increase in motivation was anticipated.
Motivating the Retained Student
5
Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks
Constructivism is evident in this study. Constructivism is a philosophy of
learning or an approach to teaching based on research and how people learn.
Constructivism, whether it is cognitive as defined by Piaget’s theory or social as defined
by Vygotsky's theory, acquiring knowledge, experience or understanding is common to
them both. As explained by Powell, Kalina, and Cody (2009), the constructivism theory
says that each individual constructs knowledge rather than receiving from others.
Teachers must learn how the students understand the world so the teacher understands
how the student can learn. Although there is a disagreement about how we learn,
constructive teaching is based on the belief that students learn best when they gain
knowledge through exploration and active learning. Constructivists aim to provide the
learner with opportunities to link to previous knowledge as well as opportunities to
practice; learn by doing. This study lends itself to the ideals of constructivism by being
centered on writing, using technology. More specifically, cognitive constructivism was
evident as the student linked previous knowledge when writing, developing paragraphs
and composing ideas on a topic. Social constructivism was evident as well as. Each
learner is viewed as a unique, motivated individual who is encouraged to construct h/her
own understanding within sociocultural environment, or the school.
The constructivist approach to teaching writing suggests that learning should be
authentic and real. Whole activities, as opposed to isolated skills, are more meaningful to
students. Using word processing programs do just that. While typing the essay, the
computer underlines misspelled words requiring the student to make a decision according
to the usage of the word. Also this program identifies sentence fragments as well as
Motivating the Retained Student
6
grammar usage. The readability level allowed students to use the thesaurus to increase
the level of their writing.
Tenet One of the LaGrange College Education Department‘s (2009) Conceptual
Framework encompassed enthusiastic engagement in learning. The competency clusters,
1.1, 1.2, 1.3, include the knowledge of content, curriculum, and learners respectively. As
previously mentioned, teachers must learn how the students understand the world so that
the teacher understands how the student can learn.
Tenet One also aligns with NCATE 2000 Standards 1 element 1A. Educators
must know their curriculum to ensure standards are being followed (LaGrange College
Education Department, 2009). This study will follow the standards for eighth grade
language arts curriculum, more specifically, writing for the state of Georgia. NBPTS
Core Propositions1and 2 involve teachers who know their subjects and know how to
teach them to students as well as knowing their learners. It is essential for the educator to
know the learner at this level, being among those that are retained. This type of learner
performs for those they seek to please. Unless the educator makes an effort to establish
that rapport, the classroom will not be conducive to learning nor will adequate learning
take place.
Tenet Two of the LaGrange College Education Department’s (2009) Conceptual
Framework refers to professional teaching practices. This tenet focuses on professional
skills teachers need in order to be competent in the classroom. Competency Cluster 2.2:
Instructional skills emphasizes conceptual learning, providing differentiation if needed.
According to the tenet explanation, cooperative and collaborative methods work best with
differentiated instruction. Collaborative planning is required in Troup County schools.
Motivating the Retained Student
7
Troup County is also an avid supporter of co-teaching classes and requires teachers of
regular education and teachers of special education to collaborate to find methods that
work with students of all levels. The method used in this study lends itself easily to
differentiation. Core Propositions 2 and 3 involve the teacher managing and monitoring
students’ learning. Adjustments and expectations can be made on assignments such as
length of an assignment as well as the level of learning. Troup County is very adamant
about differentiation training and provides opportunities regularly. Students are actively
engaged in their knowledge construction while learning was different for everyone based
on their word processing abilities. Students must see for themselves the benefit of
producing work sufficient to their level of learning. Teachers must assure that learning
experiences are designed to promote critical thinking and should integrate technology.
Tenet Three of the LaGrange College Education Department’s (2009) Conceptual
Framework: Caring and Supportive Classrooms and Learning Communities, more
specifically, Competency Cluster 3.2: Connections, is concerned with the educator as one
to foster relationships with the larger community of colleagues as well as parents to
support students’ learning. In Troup County parental involvement is encouraged. The
school system has a parental involvement initiative entitled, “Be There.” It encourages
parents to be there for each other and their children. Parental involvement as well as
community support is very important to the success of a school system as well as a
school. Community involvement was evident with the Communities in Schools program
available to the subjects of this study by meeting the students’ needs. Communities in
Schools provide students with anything from school supplies to academic support.
Community involvement was also visible with the students of this program tutoring the
Motivating the Retained Student
8
kindergartners at the elementary school located near the middle school. Teachers, as well
as the Communities in Schools’ leader, worked together to make this opportunity
possible.
This study also made connections with colleagues to share knowledge gained
through this process. Similarly, NBPTS Core Proposition 5 focuses on teachers being
members of the learning communities.
Focus Questions
The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of using word
processors to improve students’ writings subsequently increasing their self-esteem.
Although using word processors cannot develop advanced writing skills in students, it
can increase students’ motivation to write more often. The phrase “ motivation to learn”
is defined by Marshall (1987) as “the meaningfulness, value, and benefits of academic
tasks to the learner- regardless of whether or not they are intrinsically interesting”(p.135).
This study researched whether implementing strategies of using the word
processor assisted the student in motivation and/or knowledge of writing. Implementing
strategies turns the focus to the student’s own perception of his/her writing ability in
order to increase their level of writing. By the use of the word processor implemented,
students were able to edit their mistakes more easily, allowing the teacher to focus on the
content of the writing. Students not only became more engaged in their writing but also
were able to gauge self-improvement by monitoring their readability scores. While
writing, a student can monitor this score, using the thesaurus to increase his/her level
simply by choosing more difficult words, increasing sentence length as well as
Motivating the Retained Student
9
preventing run-ons and fragments. This process promoted active learning and allowed
them to become stakeholders in their education.
To change attitudes of students as writers as well as the beliefs of teachers that
writing can be less time consuming to teach, was the center of my research. Encouraging
writing as an empowering tool to becoming active learners and having such an impact on
the attitude of the learner is a vital component in the classroom. My focus questions,
therefore, had the purpose of encouraging and motivating the students and teachers. If
teachers are motivated to devote more time to writing and the student desires to write
more, then the use of word processors to write is beneficial to both. Students motivated to
be active participants in their education will continue to be successful, lifelong-learners.
1. How would utilizing word processing affect students’ writing ability?
2. How do students feel about the strategies implemented in order to motivate them
to be active participants?
3. How will change be successfully implemented in convincing stakeholders to
accept the writing instructional strategies based on the findings in this study?
Overview of Methodology
The research design was an action and an evaluation research, looking into ones
own practice and reflecting upon improvements that need to be made with the feedback
from colleagues. The setting was in a middle school located in western Georgia with a
current enrollment of approximately 927 students. Subjects and participants were chosen
because of their enrollment or employment at the school. Data consisted of focus groups,
surveys, interviews and Georgia Middle School Writing Assessment Test scores. The
surveys and interview questions were checked for fairness, offensiveness, and had no
Motivating the Retained Student
10
disparate impact on subjects or participants. The study was also checked for validity,
reliability, dependability, bias and equity.
In using the previously listed focus questions as the guide to collect and analyze
the research, qualitative and quantitative data were gathered from the teachers, students,
and administrators. The study being conducted was a combination of an action research
design and an evaluation research design. Focus groups provided the information
needed to create surveys. The surveys given to the students analyzed data such as
attitude, motivation for learning and self-perception. Teachers and administrators were
interviewed to provide data regarding the importance of attitudes toward writing and its
importance to education. Analyzing standardized test scores provided quantitative data.
How would utilizing word processing affect students’ writing ability? This focus
questioned used quantitative data. Serving as the pretest and posttest were the scores of
the students as eighth graders and as grade 8.5 students.
How do students feel about the strategies implemented in order to motivate them
to be active participants? Quantitative data consisted of a student survey that was
administered to determine attitudes toward writing using a Likert scale. A focus group
was conducted with students to gather information and opinions on writing. Survey
questions were chosen accordingly.
How will change be successfully implemented in convincing stakeholders to
accept the writing instructional strategies based on the findings in this study? Interviews
with administrators were used as means of analyzing data. Qualitative data were used in
measuring the effectiveness of the change process in the implementation of the strategies.
A focus group was conducted to obtain ideas of how teachers feel about teaching writing
Motivating the Retained Student
11
using word processors. A range of views was sought afterward from the group and
preliminary ideas were gathered to use in questions via interviews with administrators.
The setting of this study was a middle school in Georgia. All subjects were
students in grade 8.5 some of which were retained in middle school for the school year
2010-2011 based on their Criterion Referenced Competency Test scores from the
previous year.
Human as Researcher
I am an educator with 17 years of experience. For the past 4 years I have been a
language arts teacher in the 8.5 program at the middle school level. This program consists
of students who were retained in the 8th grade based on Criterion Referenced Competency
Test scores as well as students who were age appropriate-retained in a previous year of
their education. It comes, as no surprise motivation and self-esteem are obviously
obstacles in my classes. To encourage students to be stakeholders in their education and
to seek knowledge is my responsibility as an educator. Having seen roughly 100 students
come through the program, I am convinced that confidence and motivation go hand in
hand with success. Therefore in order to improve these students’ chances of graduating
from high school I have to find ways to motivate and encourage them to see the benefits
of their education.
Motivating the Retained Student
12
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Over the past two decades, the presence of computers in schools has increased
rapidly. Just as the availability of computers has increased so has their use. Goldberg,
Russell and Cook (2003), stated that “from 1998 to 2002 the percentage of students using
word processors increased from 50 percent to 85 percent” (p.3). Technology is a large
part of society today. It is very much a part of every teen’s life so when reviewing the
literature about using word processors to write, it was to no surprise the amount of
literature available. However, the literature was very mixed on the motivational factor of
using a word processor, evidence was found that could support opposing sides. The
literature, for the most part, was dated in the 1990’s and seemed at times not to apply to
today’s classroom where students are expected to use computers to write occasionally as
well as conduct research.
Educators have long been interested in the use of computers in the classroom.
While computers present a range of classroom applications, one of their most frequent
uses has been for word processing. Many studies have examined the impact of word
processing on student writing. Although there have been concerns that using computers
would make writing less creative, Goldberg et al. (2003) found that the length and quality
of writings produced on computers were greater than writings produced on paper.
Many researchers have attempted to examine influences technology has had on
today’s students, especially teens. Teenagers’ lives are filled with writing. Lenhart,
Arafeh, Smith, and Macgill (2008) revealed that while all teens write for school, 93% of
teens say they write for their own pleasure. Lenhart et al. (2008) addressed the issue of
teens’ writing being influenced by technology. They concluded that while the majority of
Motivating the Retained Student
13
teens have embraced written communication with their peers, most is done through social
networking such as emails, instant messages, and of course texts on cell phones. But
teens do not consider the material they create electronically as real writing. At the same
time they disassociate this communication with real writing, teens believe that writing is
a critical skill to achieving success and more writing at school would help.
Lenhart et al. (2008) claimed with the vast amount of abbreviated texting used by
teens, some is showing up in writing that is more formal. With teens being constant
texters, this is really no surprise. But with Georgia’s standards in language arts being that
students are to know the difference between formal and informal writing, this is
something that must be addressed. The impact made on writing with the use of
technology to compose emails, texting and other electronic communications, has its
positive and negative attributes. While writing is a very important part of their lives, the
formal writing is what will contribute to their success.
In reviewing the literature and studies done on word processing, the focus was on
examining the literature to see if there has been any reported impact on writing
motivation and performance ability, looking for increases.
Affect of the Word Processor on Students’ Writing Ability
How would utilizing word processing affect students’ writing ability? As
students use technology in many aspects today, it is very enlightening to review literature
to discover if technology can in fact affect students’ writing ability in a positive way.
When looking at the literature examining the affect of the use of word processors on
students’ ability to write, Goldberg et al. (2003) found in early studies the focus was on
students who were generally less accustomed to working with computer technology
Motivating the Retained Student
14
compared to students today. They revealed that more than half of the 200 studies done in
the past decades to examine the impact of word processing on student writing were
conducted prior to the presence and wide-scale use of current menu-driven word
processors.
Jackowski-Bartol (2001) studied the impact of word processing on middle school
students. She stated that little attention has been paid to middle school students and the
experiences they bring to writing and their attitudes on writing. Jackowski-Bartol
examines the questions that studies generally need to incorporate: does the word
processor help or hinder students’ writing and does it influence their self-conception as
writers. Roblyer and Doering (2006) reviewed the issues of students having to learn
word-processing procedures before they were able to write proficiently using a computer.
Joram, Woodruff, Lindsay, and Bryson (1990) explained that to write and revise
effectively with a word-processing program on a computer, one needs to know how to
perform the physical procedures involved in altering text. These skills are now a part of
most technology curricula in schools today.
In the meta-analysis conducted by Goldberg et al. (2003) studies from 1992-2002,
were examined focusing on the effects of computers on student writing. In looking at
these studies over this ten-year span Goldberg et al. (2003) found positive correlations
between computer use and the length and quality of writing, but mixed results when
looking at the effect of computer use on revision within the writing process. Baker and
Kinzer (as cited in Goldberg et al, 2003) found when students wrote on paper, editing
was more of a step in the writing process versus students who wrote using computers
where the revision was more integrated, students edited as they typed. However, some
Motivating the Retained Student
15
studies suggest that when students use word processors, the writing process became more
collaborative and less teacher-student centered. Other students were more involved when
it came to editing and revision. Revision began earlier in the process and students
generally produced writing with higher-quality.
Word processing software is installed on every school computer and is one of the
most used technology tools in education. Most students have some basic experience with
word processing through computer labs or required computer technology classes. Many
features of word processing can improve students’ level of writing while making text
more legible. Graham and Perin (2007, p.6) listed seven ways that word-processing helps
developing writers:

Legibility of text

Potential for publishing in variety of formats

Ease of revision

Fluent production of text (while composing)

Likelihood of supporting applications (for spelling, grammar, semantic
mapping)

Portable, easy-to-replicate electronic text (easy to share, hard to lose)

Potential for links to electronic source material
The word-processing program can help some time constraints. Word processing
has become the most commonly used software in education. Roblyer and Doering (2006)
explained the advantages of using a word-processing in writing: it saves time, enhances
document’s appearance, and allows sharing and collaboration of documents. Time is
saved by allowing writers to make corrections to word processing documents more
Motivating the Retained Student
16
quickly than they could by hand. Graham, Harris, and MacArthur (2004) studied similar
points that words and ideas can easily be added, modified, deleted, and moved using the
word-processor. The student can easily revise the text at any point without recopying the
entire paper. Graham et al. (2004) study also confirmed that materials created by wordprocessing software look more polished and professional than hand-written or typed
materials do. They stated that “the word processor allows students to produce neat,
printed work in a wide variety of professional-looking formats” (p.8). Students find it
especially motivating to produce a finished product that looks like a professional
publication. Materials can be saved to discs or other media to be shared easily.
Graham and Perin (2007) published a study on writing that proved the use of
word-processing has a positive effect on students’ writing development, and this impact
is even more evident for struggling writers. They noted word-processing can assist
students who experience considerable difficulties with spelling and the mechanical
aspects of writing. Struggling writers are inclined to avoid writing because of deficiencies
in their spelling, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure. Word processors usually
include several checking features. Checking for spelling, grammar, using the thesaurus
and readability are useful for students as writers. Spelling and grammar checking actually
provides immediate feedback and makes students more independent writers. Students
can see as they write when words are misspelled. They choose from a list of options to
make their own corrections. Students’ use of correct spelling and grammar improve
because of the repetition of seeing it written clearly. There is no delay between writing
and receiving a corrected paper, and there is no reliance on an outside authority for
making corrections. As well as checking documents for spelling, it can also check for a
Motivating the Retained Student
17
series of grammatical errors. Identifying clichés, subject-verb agreement, colloquialisms,
contractions, unclear phrasing and wordiness are the main ones. Word-processing
programs will also show the writer how to correct the marked mistakes.
Word processing programs help writers think as they compose, including software
that helps the writer set goals, generate writing content, organize ideas, and revise text.
Another tool available in modern word processors is a readability statistics analyzer.
Readability statistics are useful for students to track their own writing ability, providing
their own feedback on their writing. Microsoft word’s Flesch Reading Ease is a score
based on a formula developed in 1949 by Rudolf Flesch. Stockmeyer (2009) describes
the method by stating that “it is computed using the average number of syllables per word
and words per sentence. Syllables-per-word is a measure of difficulty. Words-persentence is an indicator of syntactic complexity” (p.46). The Flesch reading scale ranges
from 0-100. Zero to 40 is considered very difficult. Microsoft encourages authors of
standard documents to aim for a score of 60-70.
Microsoft word’s other readability score is the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level. This
score is based on research conducted by J. Peter Kincaid in the mid-1970’s. He
reformulated the Flesch test to produce a formula for computing a text’s reading grade
level. This score measures the minimum education level required for a reader to
understand the content. Certain federal agencies require that written materials meet a
specific grade level based on Flesch-Kincaid formula. According to Stockmeyer (2009)
Microsoft recommends aiming for a Flesch-Kincaid score of 7.0 to 8.0 for most
documents. Stockmeyer (2009) stated that “in a 1993 study, the average adult in the
United States reads on a seventh grade level” (p.47).
Motivating the Retained Student
18
Using the Word Processor as a Motivational Strategy
How do students feel about the strategies implemented in order to motivate them
to be active participants? Many researchers and authors have addressed the question of
motivation; why are some students motivated while others are not. Often research
classifies motivation mainly in two categories, intrinsic and extrinsic. Each has their
place and purpose in the classroom. They are both viewed as positive ways to drive
students to reach their full potential. But to fully comprehend the impact of motivation
and its connection to education, further theories must be explored that extend deeper
meaning.
Psychologists and educators have long considered the role of motivation in
student achievement and learning. However, Pintrinch and Linnenbrink (2002) explained
that since the 1980s there has been a focus on how motivational and cognitive factors
interact and influence student learning and achievement. In their study, they define
cognitive factors as referring to the knowledge or ability to acquire knowledge, while
motivation is defined as the driving force, striving to reach one’s full potential. In the
same study, Pintrich and Linnenbrink (2002) took the term motivation to this level and
linked these two factors. They described motivation as an “academic enabler for school
success and as a multifaceted construct with different components” (Pintrich &
Linnenbrink, 2002, p.313). By integrating cognitive and motivational factors Pintrich
and Linnenbrink (2002) shifted the theories from traditional motivation models to social
cognitive models of motivation. Social cognitive models took the focus from the
assumption that students are simply motivated or unmotivated, to stressing students can
Motivating the Retained Student
19
be motivated in multiple ways. The issue now is to understand how and why students are
motivated for school achievement.
Lumsden (1994) discussed student’s motivation to learn. She explained that as
children grow, their passion for learning frequently seems to shrink. Awareness of how
students’ attitudes and beliefs about learning develop and what promotes learning “for its
own sake, for the enjoyment it provides, the learning it permits, or the feelings of
accomplishment it evokes”(Lumsden, p.1), can assist educators in reducing student
apathy. Motivation drives success. Students who are motivated to write tend to spend
more time and effort writing. Spending more time on writing helps to ensure processing
skills are at work. Students need to write to improve not simply for a grade but to
achieve the process of writing. There is little interest in writing if they are only writing
for a grade.
Improving writing skills for all students is a major concern for everyone in
education. Research shows students need to feel a sense of ownership in their learning
and understand the purpose and process of their writing. When students believe they are
good writers they have confidence to write. Writing is a complex skill that requires effort
and time to master. The word-processing program can help maximize the use of time.
Students need to be given many opportunities to practice what they have learned
about writing in order to become better writers. Graham et al. (2004) explained that “if
students are not expected to write or most of their writing is limited to writing short
answers; word processing is of little value” (p.9). Word processing is not a substitute for
teaching students the strategies, skills, and knowledge needed to be a skilled writer.
Hunter, Jardine, Rilstone, Weisgerber (2001) explained that while composition length is
Motivating the Retained Student
20
not meant to be a measure of the quality of writing, researchers have examined this in the
expectation that students who write more will eventually learn to write better.
Cordaro (2009) questioned how are educators to understand student motivation to
write? Motivation, itself, is hard to research because so many other factors come into
play. Cordaro (2009) found that self-efficacy, defined as a person’s perception of his/her
own ability is a major component at the center of many of the studies examining
motivation. She expressed her belief in her 2009 collection of studies, Writing and
Motivation, that “with the right design and methodology, student motivation should and
can be empirically researched with useful outcomes” (Cordaro, p. 362).
Using the word processor to enable the student to write better is a motivational
factor. Teachers are urged to focus on changes that can be made to the school or
classroom, rather than to simply blame lack of motivation for a student performing at a
lower than expected rate.
School Improvement Focus
How will change be successfully implemented in convincing stakeholders to
accept the writing instructional strategies based on the findings in this study? While
examining research concerning the change process, the phrase “school improvement”
was very evident. Improving schools involves change. Change, however, described by
Boyd-Dimock (1992) “is not an isolated process, it occurs within the same context, the
school” (para. 1). Boyd-Dimock (1992) describes how the effect of the change on all
parts of the school has to be considered, what she refers to as the same context, each part
is dependent upon the other and each can have a negative effect on a large environment if
not done properly. How these parts are affected must be examined by the school leader.
Motivating the Retained Student
21
In reviewing the literature importance of the change process was stressed. For
this to be a successful implementation, the change process starts with a vision and is
written down to be developed into plan. Once the plan is implemented, teachers can see
the importance of being active participants in the process. Hord (2000) broke this
process down into 6 steps:

Develop and articulate a vision- know the change destination and
continually remind stakeholders of important actions to be taken

Plan and provide resources- those responsible for assisting teachers should
supply resources for teachers and allocate time needed

Invest in training and development-successful implementation involves
substantial amount of help and assistance provided by staff development

Access or monitor progress-actively monitoring progress communicates to
teachers the importance of the new program and increases support

Provide continuous assistance- coaching, consulting, follow-upinformation gleaned through assessing

Create a context conducive to change-such an environment encourages
risk taking and change of behaviors (p.2)
Attitudes of both teachers and students toward change are significant for the
success of school improvement. Both must feel what they think matters. But as Guskey
(2002) noted, the most significant changes in teachers’ attitudes and beliefs come after
they begin using a new practice successfully and see changes in student learning. Gusky
(2002) illustrates these steps in progression: “staff development, change in teachers’
Motivating the Retained Student
22
classroom, change in student learning outcomes, and then change in teachers’ beliefs and
attitudes” (p.383).
A starting point for any change is a clear vision. Vision has a variety of
definitions, all of which include a mental image or picture, a point of intention, and a
potential course of how to reach the mark. Boyd-Dimmock (1992) explains that a vision
serves as a marker pointing to where an organization needs to go. She also specifies that a
vision should guide the work of the organization because a vision should be a picture of
the future for which people are willing to work.
Visions should motivate, inspire and engage people. They have become a
powerful feature necessary to school improvement. Manasse (as cited in Mendez-Morse,
1993) defines a “vision as the force which molds meaning for the people of an
organization and a compelling picture of the future that inspires commitment” (para.4). It
encourages people to work, to strive for its attainment. Educational leaders, who strive to
see change in their school or district, hunger to see improvement. Fullan (1992) explained
that “schools are in the business of contending with multiple innovations
simultaneously.” He explains that principals do well to develop collaborative work
cultures to help staff deal with innovations. Fullan (1992) also believes that principals
should “strive to be not an instructional leader, but rather a leader of instructional leaders.
He or she is responsible for making vision-building a collective exercise” (p.20).
Educators are being challenged to meet the needs of students to prepare them for
the future. They must first meet the challenge with a vision, a future goal that is shared
by teachers, students, administrators, parents and any other stakeholders. The
relationship between teachers’ and administrators’ visions is important. Mendez-Morse
Motivating the Retained Student
23
(1993) compared the vision of an administrator to that of a teacher by illustrating how
administrators’ visions have to encompass the whole system while teachers’ visions are
more individualized or specific to their classrooms.
Motivating the Retained Student
24
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The study conducted was a combination of an action research design and an
evaluation research design. Action research is defined by Borgia and Schuler (1996) as
“an approach to professional development and improved student learning in which
teachers systematically reflect on their work and make changes in their practice” (p.2).
Sometimes the hardest part of change is when it comes from “top down,” from people
outside of the classroom. Action research involves looking at one's own practice and
then reflecting and seeking support and feedback from colleagues. Rather than being
conducted by researchers, it is conducted by teachers. Creswell (2002) stated that action
research often utilizes both quantitative and qualitative data. He explained the purpose of
action research is to improve the practice of education by individuals conducting research
on their own problems. Teachers learn what it is they are able to influence and make
changes that produce results that show change based on data. The student is the subject
and object of the question. Johnson and Christensen (2008) defined action research as a
never-ending process because most problems are not fully solved through a single
research study. In this study, action research design was used by seeking teachers input
regarding teaching writing and presenting them with the idea to teach writing using the
word processing program.
Johnson and Christensen (2008) defined evaluation research as specifically
determining the worth, merit, or quality of an evaluation object, such as an educational
program. Charles and Mertler (2002) described evaluating programs by looking for gains
in achievement, acceptance of program and producing changes based on interviews and
Motivating the Retained Student
25
observations. Evaluation of a program is divided into five areas or assessments; needs,
theory, implementation, impact, and efficiency. It is in applying these areas that a
program can be deemed effective. This study addresses all five areas of assessment as
addressed by Johnson and Christensen (2008) therefore; it also has an overarching
evaluation research component.
The comparison between last year’s 8.5 students and this year’s 8.5 students was
conducted gathering quantitative data from the two groups. An independent-t was
conducted using state writing test scores to analyze for significant differences between
each group’s 8th grade scores and their 8.5 scores. Surveys were conducted to measure
students’ motivation and attitudes toward writing. Focus groups provided the information
needed to create surveys. Data was collected through surveys using a Likert scale and
analyzed using a chi square to note significance of each question. Teachers participated
in a focus group to see how language arts teachers feel about teaching writing as well as
teaching writing using the word processor. Administrators were interviewed to provide
data regarding the importance of attitudes toward writing and its importance to education.
Qualitative coding was used to access the interviews.
Setting
The site for this study was in a middle school in a rural county in west central
Georgia. The school was located in a community of a recent arrival of a Korean
manufacturer. The school’s enrollment population at the time of this study was 927
students with 59% eligible for free or reduced price lunch. Of the school’s 927 students
enrolled, 58% were White, 36% were Black, 2% were Hispanic and 1% was
Asian/Pacific Islander. All participants and the setting were chosen purposefully for the
Motivating the Retained Student
26
convenience of those involved. Access to this location was chosen because it is the
school in which I taught.
Subjects and Participants
Subjects and participants for this study were chosen purposefully. Teachers of 8th
grade language arts were chosen for their knowledge in the subject matter. The teachers
chosen have 4 to17 years experience, and students were chosen because they were in my
language arts class of grade 8.5. A total of 5 participants and 13 subjects were used in
this study. Of the subjects 62.5% or 8 were females and 37.5% or 5 were males. 37.5%
or 5 were Black, 50% or 7 were White and 6.25% or 1 was multi-racial. All 13 subjects
were retained in the 8th grade for the school year 2010-2011.
Procedures and Methods
The data for this research were collected by assessments, surveys, focus groups
and interviews. Table 3.1 provides an outline of the data collected and the methods that
were used in this research study. Assessments consisted of state writing tests, used as
pre/posttests. Surveys were a combination of questions from Daly and Miller test online,
Student Motivation Survey Self-Assessment, Smart and Cool America and some were
created on my own. Subjects completed surveys and interviews were conducted with
participants to analyze attitudes toward writing. Focus groups were conducted with the
teachers and students; administrators were interviewed to provide data.
Motivating the Retained Student
Table 3.1
Data Shell
Focus
Question
How would
utilizing word
processing
affect
students’
writing
ability?
Literature
Sources
Hunter,
Jardine,
Rilstone,
Weisgerber
(2001)
Joram,
Woodruff,
Lindsay, &
Bryson
(1990)
Type of Method,
Data and
Validity:
Method:
How are data
analyzed:
Assessment-pretest
GMSWT, 09-10,
-Posttest
GMSWT, 10-11
Essay grader score
independent t-tests
To determine if there
are significant
differences
Chi Square
Look for significant
differences.
Rationale
Data:
Quantitative
Validity:
Content
JackowskiBartol (2001)
How do
students feel
about the
strategies
implemented
order to
motivate
them to be
active
participants?
How will
change be
successfully
implemented
in convincing
stakeholders
to accept the
writing
instructional
strategies
based on the
findings in
this study?
Method:
Lumsden
(1994)
Survey (from focus
group)
Likert Scale
Cronbach’s alpha
Cordaro
(2009)
Graham,
Harris &
MacArthur
(2004)
Data:
Quantitative
Validity:
Construct
Method:
BoydDimmock
(1992)
Fullan
(1992)
interview
(administrators)
coded for common
themes
focus group(teachers)
Recurring
Dominant
Emerging
Data:
Qualitative
MendezMorse (1993)
Validity:
Construct
Look for
categorical and
repeating data
27
Motivating the Retained Student
28
How would utilizing word processing affect students’ writing ability? This focus
questioned used quantitative data. The quantitative data used were the writing scores
from the Georgia Middle School Writing Test. The scores used for the pretests were the
students’ scores obtained in 8th grade on the writing test for school year 2008-2009 and
2009-2010. The writing test scores of these same students in grade 8.5 for school year
2009-2010 and 2010-2011 served as posttests. Only the students of the 2010-2011 class
received the implementation of the word processor strategy. This strategy entails using
the computer to type documents in Microsoft word, using the tools such as spelling,
grammar, sentence fragments, word count and readability level.
How do students feel about the strategies implemented in order to motivate them
to be active participants? A focus group with students (see Appendix A) was used to
gather information about their opinions of writing. Quantitative data consisted of a
student survey that was administered to determine differences obtained in the students’
attitudes toward the implementation of the strategies that focused on them as stakeholders
(see Appendix B). It also analyzed the motivation of the students as writers overall by
using a Likert scale. By using this quantitative data the surveys analyzed the relationship
of the students’ motivation to the role as active learners. The survey asked students
questions about their writing preferences along with the attitude toward writing using pen
and paper or the computer. This information gave the researcher an idea about the
motivation of the students to use later in the research.
How will change be successfully implemented in convincing stakeholders to
accept the writing instructional strategies based on the findings in this study? Interviews
with administrators were used as means of analyzing data (see Appendix C). Qualitative
Motivating the Retained Student
29
data were gathered to measure the effectiveness of the change process in the
implementation of the strategies. A focus group (see Appendix D) was conducted to
obtain ideas of how teachers feel about teaching writing in general and ways it possibly
could be improved. Using the word processor program was discussed. A range of views
was sought from the group and preliminary ideas were gathered to use in questions via
interviews with administrators.
Validity, Reliability, Dependability, Bias, and Equity
For focus question one, how would utilizing word processing affect students’
writing ability, quantitative data was used. Use of quantitative data, assessment scores
from the 8th grade Georgia Middle School Writing Test, showed evidence of contentrelated validity. Validity of data was assured by using pretest and posttest scores from the
Georgia Middle School Writing Test. The parallel correlation of the test scores provided
reliability. The interval data was free of bias because it was a mandated state test.
According to the Georgia Department of Education’s (n.d.) website, Georgia’s
performance-based writing assessments are administered to students in grades three, five,
eight, and eleven.
Focus question two, how do students feel about the strategies implemented in
order to motivate them to be active participants, quantitative Likert-type surveys were
used. The use of survey results using nominal data with the Likert scale, showed evidence
of construct validity. Salkind (2007) states that construct validity is “based on some
underlying construct or idea behind a test or measurement tool” (p.154). The reliability
measure used was the Cronbach’s alpha for survey data. This study surveyed the attitudes
toward writing. Length of time for data collection was persistent and prolonged over a
Motivating the Retained Student
30
two week period. Data collected from the surveys were accurately recorded and
maintained. The surveys given were reviewed by another teacher and a student not
taking the survey and determined not to contain any unfair, offensive or disparate impact
on subjects or participants who were involved in the study.
Focus question three, how will change be successfully implemented in convincing
stakeholders to accept the writing instructional strategies based on the findings in this
study, qualitative data were used. The qualitative data were gathered through
interviewing the administrator and conducting a focus group with the 8th grade language
arts teachers. Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) explain the aim of focus groups “is not to
reach a consensus about or solutions to, the issues discussed, but to bring forth different
viewpoints on an issue” (p.150). The interview questions, showed construct-related
validity and were controlled for bias due to the alignment of the focus questions and the
reliability of the educators providing information. The focus group’s comments were
recorded and later turned into questions formulated to summarize the information
gathered. The interview questions ensured dependability by data being recorded with the
use of audio taping. Transcripts were checked for accuracy by the interviewees. A
detailed methods section has been written. Raw data were maintained and organized. A
chain of events took place to get a final conclusion: the research questions connect to a
theory about writing, which connects to the focus questions, and then to conclusions.
Kvale and Brinkmann (2009) clarified that “objectivity as freedom from bias refers to
reliable knowledge, checked and controlled, undistorted by personal bias and prejudice”
(p.242). The interview questions were free of bias by remaining objective in content.
Motivating the Retained Student
31
Analysis of Data
Focus question one, how would utilizing word processing affect students’ writing
ability, used an independent-t test to determine if there were significant differences
between means from two independent groups. The decision to reject the null hypothesis
has been set at p < .05. Data was tested using an independent-t comparing pre/post tests
scores with the previous’ years group to measure for significant differences. By
definition, an independent-t test finds the difference on the average scores of one variable
between the groups that were independent of each other (Salkind, 2007).The quantitative
data were analyzed by comparing pre/post tests scores with the previous’ years group to
see if there was any significance of implementation of using the word processing
strategies to improve writing. Effect size (ES) is a name given to a family of indices that
measure the magnitude of a treatment effect. Unlike significance tests, these indices are
independent of samples size measured with Cohen’s d for independent groups.
Focus question two, how do students feel about the strategies implemented in
order to motivate them to be active participants, used Likert-type surveys. As mentioned
previously, the surveys were a combination of questions from Daly & Miller test online,
Student Motivation Survey Self-Assessment from Smart and Cool America and the focus
group of students. A Chi Square was computed to check for significance of the survey
questions. The data were entered into a Chi Square to help determine what questions
were significant on the survey and which ones were not.
Focus question three, how will change be successfully implemented in convincing
stakeholders to accept the writing instructional strategies based on the findings in this
study, qualitative data was used. The focus group’s comments were formulated into
Motivating the Retained Student
32
questions taken from the discussion, and were coded for themes looking for categorical
and repeating data that could be identified as recurring, dominant or emerging themes.
The interview transcripts and focus group questions were then compared to look for
similarities between perspectives of the teachers and administrators.
To look at the research from a holistic perspective, validation, credibility,
transferability and transformational concepts must be addressed. Lichtman (2006)
clarified by “looking at qualitative research holistically it involves the study of a situation
or things in its entirety rather than identification of specific variables” (p.11). Creswell
(2002) defines validity as referring to the degree to which a study accurately reflects or
assesses the specific concept that the researcher is attempting to measure.
Validation of the study was significant to its credibility. Consensual validation
was confirmed with faculty approval and close monitoring of the study. Eisner (1991)
refers to the faculty review process as ‘Consensual Validation,’ an agreement among
competent others that the description, interpretation, evaluation and thematic are precise
throughout the research. Denzin and Lincoln (2000) described the cycling back to one’s
literature review as ‘Epistemological Validation,’ which remained consistent with the
views and theories presented in this literature. Epistemology, the process of seeking truth,
was evident when this consistency occurred.
To ensure credibility, multiple data sources were used also known as structural
corroboration. Structural corroboration is also explained by Zeph (1985) as “a process
through which pieces of information are put together in such a way that they support one
another and create a whole” (p.14). The combination of quantitative data, interviews,
focus groups and surveys all combine to create a whole picture of the research for
Motivating the Retained Student
33
implementing word processing strategies. To make certain fairness was evident, opposing
sides were presented in the literature review. Great care was taken to ensure precision
and accuracy presenting all views and perspectives of the stakeholders. This accuracy is
also known as “rightness of fit.”
Transferability refers to the usefulness of the research by others and the fact that it
can easily be replicated for future research. Eisner (1991) refers to ‘referential adequacy’
as perception and understanding of others increasing because of this research. In this
study, the research will be useful to others and even increase understanding but only with
a group of students that had been retained. The setting and subjects of this research are a
crucial factor in the conducting, carrying out and outcome of such a study. The location
and the program in which the study was conducted is the only one of its kind. The
quantitative data was able to be obtained by using the state writing tests as pre/posttests
because of the involvement of the same students by the fact they were retained in the
same grade.
When considering transformational ability or more specifically referred to as
‘catalytic validity,’ Lather (as cited by Denzin & Lincoln, 1998) explains research that
possesses catalytic validity will direct those in the study to gain self-understanding and
self-direction. In applying Lather’s definition of catalytic validity to particular research,
the evidence of being impactful was seen when the results of the study examine the
effects of implementing word processor programs to motivate and improve writing.
Determining teacher quality equity, the discussion of Skrla, McKenzie, and
Scheurich (2009) “for the purpose of equity audit, (….) distribution of teacher experience
across the range of instructional setting” (p.35) was used. This would pertain to the group
Motivating the Retained Student
34
of teachers involved in the study as described below. Skrla et al. (2009) explains how the
“pattern of assignments of the teachers within a school can determine equitable or
inequitable access to the resource of experienced teachers among different students”
(p.35). There is a relative distribution of expertise. As referred to previously in this
paragraph, one teacher is pursuing a master’s degree and has 4 years of teaching
experience. Another has 7 years experience with a bachelor’s degree, while the last two
have a master’s and a doctorate with 12 and 17 years of experience respectively.
Summary of Chapter 3
Teachers learning what it is they are able to influence and make changes that
produce results that show change based on data is what action research is all about.
Determining the wealth or merit of the research in order to make this change is evaluative
research. Using the variation of data such as surveys, interviews, focus groups and test
scores allowed the study to be examined both quantitatively and qualitatively. Focus
questions drove the gathering of the data using content and construct validity. The
research was gathered in a rural community where the population is made up of black,
white, Asian, and Hispanic students. The study involved 13 subjects repeating the 8th
grade and 5 participants consisting of administrators and teachers. Subjects completed
surveys to examine the attitudes toward writing. A Chi Square was used to test for
significance of the questions. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with
participants to analyze attitudes toward writing and were coded by theme. An
independent-t and Cohen’s d effect size calculation were conducted using the writing test
scores as pre/posttest scores to see if implementing strategies improved students’ writing
and motivation to write. The study showed validity, reliability, dependability and
Motivating the Retained Student
35
freedom of bias by using the methods listed above. The data were secured, maintained
and organized. The surveys and interview questions were not unfair, offensive or had
any disparate impact on subjects or participants. Equity was ensured by using an equity
checklist. The study was also looked at holistically for validity, credibility,
transferability and for transformation. The study was approved and monitored by the
faculty and showed results that compared to the literature. Multiple sources were used as
well as opposing views presented. Researcher hoped to see a positive change come from
the outcome of this study.
Motivating the Retained Student
36
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS
This chapter gives results organized and presented by focus question. The first
focus question, “How would utilizing word processing affect students’ writing ability,”
used quantitative data. The scores from the Georgia Middle School Writing Tests were
examined and compared to those scores from previous year’s students in 8.5. The 20092010 students’ 8th grade scores (2008-2009) served as pretest scores. These scores were
then compared to their writing scores from their 8.5 (2009-2010) serving as posttests.
The 8.5 class of 2010-2011 8th grade test scores (taken in 2009-2010) serving as pretests
were also compared to their writing scores from their 8.5 year (2010-2011) serving as
posttests. Independent-t tests were used to compare the means of the pre and posttest
scores for each group to look for any significant differences in the scores. The tables
listed below shows the calculations of each group’s pre and posttest scores.
Table 4.1 – Independent-t test Results for writing scores
Writing score '09
Writing score '10
Mean
186.4375
197.3125
Variance
920.5292
234.0958333
16
16
Observations
Hypothesized Mean Difference
Df
0
30
t Stat
-1.28017
P(T<=t) one-tail
0.105147
t Critical one-tail
1.697261
P(T<=t) two-tail
0.210295
t Critical two-tail
2.042272
t(30) = 1.28, p > .05
Motivating the Retained Student
37
Table 4.2- Independent-t test Results for writing scores
Writing Score '10
Mean
Variance
Observations
Hypothesized Mean Difference
Df
Writing Score '11
204
202.6153846
186.3333
171.5897436
13
13
0
24
t Stat
0.26388
P(T<=t) one-tail
0.397063
t Critical one-tail
1.710882
P(T<=t) two-tail
0.794125
t Critical two-tail
2.063899
t(24) = .26, p > .05
In looking at the writing scores of the 09-10 class of 8.5, the mean for the pretest
(scores from 2009) was 186.44 and the mean for the posttest (scores from 2010) was
197.31, showing an increase in the average score from the pretest to the posttest. The
results of the 2009-2010 8.5 students show that t(30) = 1.28, p > .05. This means the
obtained value of the test, 1.28, was less than the critical value of 1.69. Therefore, the
null hypothesis is confirmed. There is no difference between what occurred on the
posttest and what was expected, so the results cannot be considered significant. For the
2010-11 class of 8.5, the mean for the pretest (scores from 2010) was 204 and the mean
for the posttest (scores from 2011) was 202, showing a decrease in the average score
from the pretest to the posttest. The results of the 2010-2011 8.5 students show that t(24)
= .26, p > .05. This means the obtained value of the test, .26, was less than the critical
value of 1.71 and again the null hypothesis must be accepted. Neither group produced
results that showed significance in the differences between the pre and posttests.
Motivating the Retained Student
38
The Effect Size using Cohen’s d for the two groups were as follows:
2009-10 group- d=.46 which is considered medium or a 27.4% of non-overlap in the two
distributions while 2010-11 group- d=.14, which is considered small or a 7.7% of nonoverlap in the two distributions.
The second focus question, “How do students feel about the strategies
implemented in order to motivate them to be active participants” used quantitative data.
The Likert scale survey was compiled of information gathered during a focus group with
the students. The survey consisted of 18 questions, 16 were to be answered “strongly
disagree,” “disagree,” “agree,” or “strongly agree.” The last two questions were answered
differently, “often,” “sometimes,” “rarely,” “never” for number 17- “How often do you
use Microsoft word or some other word processing product?” Number 18- “How would
you rate your typing skills?” was answered “fast and error free,” “pretty good,”
“average,” “lousy.” During the focus group the students were encouraged to discuss
their opinions of using computers to write, the way writing is taught, and how they feel
about having their writing graded.
The first focus group question, “What do you think about using computers to
write essays,” came with much discussion. Student 4 said that she liked using the
computer to write because it was less tiring and she types faster than she writes. Student
15 stated, “I don’t like to use computers because I am not comfortable with them. I would
rather write my essays by hand.” Student 5 liked how computers catch spelling errors
while student 6 said it was easy if you made a mistake to insert a word rather than erase a
whole line. But student 8 brought up the fact that it is easier to edit your work on paper
and that computers can have electronic failures and lose your work. Student 6 said,
Motivating the Retained Student
39
“When you write your essay on paper, it looks like you have written a lot but when you
type it, it looks so small.” So overall the students thought of several reasons for and
against using the computer to write essays.
The second focus group question: “How do you feel about someone grading your
writing?” This question was followed with student 13 stating, “You mean a teacher or
student? I don’t mind a teacher, but I don’t like another student grading my work.”
Student 2 said, “I know other people, including your teacher, may see mistakes that you
didn’t see, but what I don’t get is when someone grades your journal. I think grading
journals is silly. This is supposed to be your writing and opinions. Your journals don’t
need to be graded. If I know my work is going to be graded, I get nervous about turning
it in.”
The last focus group question: “How would you teach writing if you were the
teacher?” Student 4 said that she would teach how to write a sentence, or teach sentence
structure. “If someone can’t write a sentence, how are they going to write a paragraph?”
Student 6 suggested, “Teach details and how to stay on the main topic.” Student 7 said,
“Just teach someone about focusing on ideas because it is the ideas that really matter.”
One student (Student 1) even suggested focusing more on vocabulary and requiring
students to use different vocabulary which is easier to do if students use computers.
Overall the students’ focus group was enlightening. Many students did point out
advantages of computer use such as spell check and punctuation corrections. However
they also pointed out disadvantages such as being distracted by the computer tools such
as font and accidentally deleting your work or saving it under a name they don’t
remember.
Motivating the Retained Student
40
The focus group discussion served the purpose for narrowing the focus of the
topic, learning to write using computers. It gave me the opportunity to hear concerns the
students had using the computers as well as the advantages they thought it offered. They
also brought up the fact that even if students are allowed to type essays throughout the
year, the Georgia Writing Test will still be administered on paper to be hand-written.
Through this group discussion, I was able to identify specific questions I needed to ask.
Table 4.3 – Chi-Square Statistics for Survey questions
Survey Items
Survey Question
n=18
Χ2
6.44
Item 2
I don’t think I write as well as other
people.
I think I am a good speller.
Item 3
My paragraphs are not long enough.
12.79**
Item 4
I feel confident in the length of my
paragraphs.
I write well developed sentences.
11.53**
I feel confident in my ability to clearly
express my ideas in writing.
I have grammar problems in my writing.
I am very confident in my computer
skills.
I avoid writing.
I don’t like to type my essays on the
computer.
Writing is a lot of fun.
9*
10.68*
Item 13
I have no fear of my writing being
evaluated.
I am very confident in my ability to write.
Item 14
I am a poor speller.
8.16*
Item 15
I like to write in my free time.
9.2*
Item 16
My sentences are short and choppy.
12.79**
Item 17
How often do you use Microsoft word or
some other word processing product?
Item 18
How would you rate your typing skills?
11.33*
(Often, sometimes, rarely,
never)
20.37***
(fast and error free, pretty
good, Average, lousy)
Item 1
Item 5
Item 6
Item 7
Item 8
Item 9
Item 10
Item 11
Item 12
*p<.05, **p<.01,***p<.001
18.44***
12.37**
11.95**
11.78**
9*
6.8
1
2.68
Motivating the Retained Student
41
The results of the chi-square statistics for the survey highlighted significant
questions. Survey items 2 and 18 found to be highly significant when p < .001, meaning
that there were a high percentage of students that answered a certain way on these
questions and the data is useful. However, items 1, 10, and 11 were not significant at all,
which means there were no significant differences on these questions between the
observed and the expected therefore the data is not useful. Question number one,
students don’t think they write as well as other people, is not significant at the .05 level,
χ(3)=6.4, p > .05. Most students disagreed (strongly disagreed, or disagreed) with the
statement and feel they write as well as anyone else. Question number ten, students don’t
like to type essays on the computer, was also not significant at the .05 level, χ(3)=6.8, p>
.05. Most students disagreed (strongly disagreed or disagreed) with the statement and do
like to type essays on the computer. Also, question number eleven, writing is a lot of fun,
was not significant at the .05 level, χ (3)= 1.0, p>.05. Students answered in a closely
related manner under each category with the middle being four students agreeing and six
disagreeing. Question number two, students think they are a good speller, was very
significant at the .001 level, χ(3)=18.4, p< .001. Most students agreed they are good
spellers. Also, question eighteen, asking students to rate their typing skills was very
significant at the .001 level, χ(3)=20.3, p<.001. Most students rated themselves as pretty
good. Other observations gathered from the survey; most disagreed they write short,
choppy sentences, (12 out of 19), and have grammar problems, (11 out of 19).
To determine the internal consistency reliability of the items on the survey given
to students, the Cronbach’s Alpha test was conducted using the survey responses. The
purpose of this test was to correlate the score for each item with the total score for each
Motivating the Retained Student
42
student in order to make sure the survey items measured only what they were intended to
measure. For the survey, the Cronbach’s Alpha was α = .83. Therefore the survey
showed a high level of reliability using the Cronbach’s Alpha test.
The third focus question, “How will change be successfully implemented in
convincing stakeholders to accept the writing instructional strategies based on the
findings in this study,” used qualitative data. Survey/questionnaire was used to survey
the language arts teachers of the 8th grade, along with the academic coach for middle and
high school English, was conducted using questions (see Appendix D). For the sake of
anonymity they will all be referred to as teachers.
Teachers were asked, “Do you feel changes are needed in the way writing is
taught?” Two common themes for this question were portfolio writing and writing across
the curriculum. Teacher 1 stated, “We need to include topics that appeal to all levels
while keeping a portfolio of their writings in order to show gains.” Teacher 2 stated, “I
would like to see more involvement across the curriculum. I think teachers should use
writing to support learning in their subject area. However, it does concern me as a
language arts teacher about other subject teachers maybe not stressing mechanics of
writing. I wouldn’t want students to slack off in this area. All teachers need to add to a
student’s portfolio so that any teacher can see the progress in the student’s writing. I also
would like to see more research and writing incorporated in every high school subject,
particularly for the more accelerated students.” Teacher 3 stated, “I think some changes
need to be made. More portfolio writing would be great with more revision; however,
with writing tests, we must prepare our students to write under a time crunch.”
Motivating the Retained Student
43
The second question asked was, “What could make teaching writing easier?” The
emerging themes here was teaching writing with consistency in other grade levels and
focusing on the process. Teacher 3 said, “I think one thing that could make teaching
writing easier is stressing writing from other grade levels. Basics should be taught in
other grade levels as well. Students would be less reluctant to write if it was something
they did in all classes.” Teacher 1 stated, “Utilize a variety of pre-writing instruments
where students must plan and organize their ideas before they write. Don’t eliminate the
process. It should be an intricate part.” According to teacher 2, effective strategies
should consistently be used through all grade levels to build confidence in students as
writers. Effective strategies, such as “Writing to Win” give students more guidance but it
is not used consistently throughout all levels.
Question three asked teachers if they felt every writing assignment should be
graded. Teacher 2 stressed again the use of the “Writing to Win” strategy would assist in
grading. She felt that not everything should be necessarily for a grade, but “…it is
important that students get comments from their teachers on what they have written.”
Teacher 2 also brought up a valid argument about students sharing their work, “After a
season of writing, students should be asked to choose one of their essays or writing
assignments to share with other students in an oral presentation.” Teacher 3 stated that
only major assignments should be for a grade and journals should be graded using a
different scale. Teacher 1 was completely against grading. She stated, “No. Group
writing assignments should be fun, creative, and without a grade. This gives students a
chance to converse with one another on all levels without feeling added pressure of
obtaining a grade.”
Motivating the Retained Student
44
The last question on the questionnaire asked, “How effective would it be to use
computers to help teach writing?” All agreed it would be effective but for different
reasons. Teacher 1’s reason was, “Using computers in writing helps the students who
usually are not interested in it or have trouble with the process. It also assists in
improving behavior because students are actively involved.” Teacher 2 agreed with
computers being effective but she felt, “…mostly in the high school setting.” She also
stated, “Using computers can provide students with appropriate and timely commentary,
the computer is an essential component. Although most computer-generated grading
programs are limited, they can be effective for student practice. One major point to
remember is that computers will never replace the teacher, and students have the right to
expect their instructors to read and comment on what has been composed.” Teacher 3
felt using computers to teach writing would be very effective because, “…students use
computers now for everything. They are very comfortable with them more so than their
handwriting and own spelling abilities. Also, the students in college and some high
schools require the use of computers for most assignments. If we allowed students to
use computers more to write, they would be better prepared for those classes.”
Along with the teachers’ answers to the questionnaires, the curriculum
administrator was also interviewed (see Appendix C). When asked, how she expected
writing to be taught in school, she replied with explaining the “Writing to Win” initiative
put in place in our county. The curriculum administrator stated, “Our county has bought
into this program for two reasons: to help reluctant writers and to encourage writing
across the curriculum.” She explained, “When students struggle in writing, they have
issues with the subject matter. In this program, the teacher gives the students strategies
Motivating the Retained Student
45
by letter and if this is practiced in all classes this will become easier for students. For
example,” she went on to explain, “if the teacher says, ‘Ok, today we will use Strategy
A.’ The students know they are to finish a starter sentence such as…Today I learned.. and
the teacher tells them if they are on target, approaching the target, or if they missed the
target (or purpose of the writing). In the teacher’s directions, he/she would tell the
student the minimum number of sentences acceptable.” The administrator explained that
consistency in writing helps those reluctant writers because they know exactly what is
expected of them.
The next question was, “What do you feel is the teacher’s role in teaching
writing?” She again related her answer to the “Writing to Win,” saying this program
outlines exactly what the teacher’s role is and that is making students comfortable in their
writing. Teachers should, of course, assist students if needed, but at the same time they
should strive for independent writers.
“How do you feel about implementing change in the way writing is taught in
8.5?” The administrator was supportive and said that if something was successful in
encouraging students to write, she would certainly support it. She stated, “8.5 is a unique
group of students who has probably experienced many writing assignments, some
reluctantly. If there was a way to raise their self-esteem while encouraging them to write,
I would certainly have no problem with it.”
The last question of the interview was, “How do you feel the results of this study
will affect the teaching of writing?” In answering this question she again expressed how
unique the 8.5 program was and anything that motivated these students would be a
welcomed change. She stated, “Now if everyone wanted to change the way writing is
Motivating the Retained Student
46
taught by using the computer labs, we might have a problem. But if it is one group (or
two classes) then I believe we could work it out. After all students use computers so
much in their everyday lives, it is really very practical to allow them to write essays. I
also like the idea of seeking self-improvement and actually charting their results as far as
their grade level and such to immediately see their gains.” She did express a concern of
dependency on the computers as far as spelling and even punctuation. But was then
assured these components would still be taught in the traditional manner. In considering
writing for a grade, the administrator stated, “This would assist teachers, somewhat, with
the grading process of writing and enable them to give the students feedback quicker. I’d
be very interested to see the results of this study.”
Common themes between the teachers and administrator were (1) writing across
the curriculum, (2) implementing the “Writing to Win” program, and (3) the practicality
of students using computers to write. Both felt that writing across the curriculum was
extremely important for the students to write in all classes. However, the concern of
other subject teachers grading the writing just for content was expressed. They were
concerned the other subject teachers may not require students to use mechanics of
grammar correctly. The administrator and teacher both agreed the “Writing to Win”
strategy was effective in consistency throughout grade levels. Both also expressed the
effectiveness of the strategies in helping reluctant writers. Lastly, the common theme of
the practicality of students using computers was articulated in that it would benefit
students in the future and help teachers with giving timely feed-back so that mistakes can
be corrected.
Motivating the Retained Student
47
Although Chapter Four’s quantitative and qualitative data contradict each other in
some ways, both were very informative to the study. The teachers and administrators
overall seemed very agreeable with the effectiveness of using computers in teaching
writing while the actual quantitative data seemed not so evident of computer
effectiveness. Chapter Five will offer more insight into the study.
Motivating the Retained Student
48
CHAPTER FIVE: ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
Analysis
In Chapter 5 the results from the collected data were compared to the research
reviewed looking for similarities and differences. Did my research prove, disprove or
modify what the current literature states?
For the first focus question, “How would utilizing word processing affect
students’ writing ability,” I used quantitative data. The scores from the Georgia Middle
School Writing Test were examined and compared to look for significant differences.
The scores obtained were from two groups. Each group’s 8th grade writing scores were
compared to their 8.5 scores. The purpose of this focus question was to see if the data
would show if implementation of teaching writing using the Microsoft word processor
program would make a difference in the students’ writing scores from the previous year
to the current year referred to in the study as pretests and posttests.
The data, as measured by an Independent-t test, from the two groups were
compared looking for a significant difference and showed none. The results showed the
null hypothesis must be accepted. With the 2009 8.5 group, writing was taught in the
traditional classroom. The assignments were hand-written on notebook paper, edited and
graded in the traditional manner. The 8.5 group from 2010 used the Microsoft word
processor program for their writing assignments. The Microsoft program involved tools
for spell checking, grammar correctness, as well as the Flesch-Kincaid readability tools.
I feel the data measured what it was supposed to measure because my research was
looking for significant gains in the writing scores with the group that used the computers
for various assignments leading up to writing essays. The 2009 group’s mean increased
Motivating the Retained Student
49
from 186.44 to 197.31 yet the 2010 group’s mean decreased from 204 to 202, neither
being significant. As you can see the 2010 group did start off higher and scored higher
still as a group on the posttest. The Effect Size using Cohen’s d for the two groups was
medium at d=.46 which indicates a 27.4% of non-overlap in the two distributions for the
2009-10 group and small at d=.14 which indicates a 14.7% of non-overlap in the two
distributions for the 2010-11 group.
I began in August with the writing instruction in the classroom as part of our 8th
grade curriculum, so when it was time to think about gathering my data with the
computer instruction, I decided to start small. Before we went to the lab to do any
writing using the computers, my students were instructed to complete journal entries on
the student computer in the classroom; this took place in December. The procedure was
as follows: on days the students saw the prompt on the computer they would go over
individually and type in a response. I monitored their time, worked with them
individually as I could, and showed them how to save their work in their class folder as
well as how to pull up the prompt for the next student. This did take time, but it paid off
later when we visited the lab to begin our essays. The journal entry activity was done for
about three days. It was impossible to give all of the students an opportunity to respond
in one class period while keeping the others on task and it came down to, “Ok, who did
not respond to the prompt, Tuesday?” This was not the kind of monitoring I was hoping
for, however, I was able to observe the level of keyboarding skills on an individual basis
when asked for assistance. Roblyer and Doering (2006) stated that such factors as
keyboarding skills may influence outcomes. Graham et al.’s (2004) study also verified
the importance of students learning to type fluently. Graham et al. (2004) stated that if
Motivating the Retained Student
50
fluency doesn’t exist, speed of producing text is lost. The ability to type fluently was
listed as one of the primary advantages of using the word processing program in their
study. I did see this first hand. When a student’s keyboarding skills lacked speed,
frustration did set in.
The next step to use the computers for writing was in preparation for the Georgia
Middle School Writing Test given every January. To prepare students for this yearly
assessment, the county conducts an “All-write” writing assignment. This is where
students receive writing prompts from the county very similar to the ones they receive
from the state for the actual assessment; they are required to complete an essay just as
they would for the actual test. On this particular practice, although teachers guide the
students through each step and time is not monitored, the final essay is written by the
student alone and turned in for a grade. Teachers grade these essays making editing
marks for students to become aware of their weaknesses but not to be corrected and
returned. At the same time teachers also become aware of each student’s weakness. This
enables the process of corrective teaching or addressing the weaknesses to be identified
and corrected before the actual test. I decided this would be a good opportunity to start
the process of typing essays on the computers. Students completed all steps of the writing
process, as required on the state test, on paper before going into the lab. Then the
students typed from their handwritten final copy. I needed this as a point of reference to
identify improvement. By typing the essays, the students were able to utilize the tools of
the word processor such as spell check and grammar correctness. The research supports
the position that students utilizing computers on a regular basis are likely to perform
better on online writing assessments than they are on paper-and-pencil based writing
Motivating the Retained Student
51
assessments (Way et al., 2008). But we are not to the point of administering our writing
assessments online. As a result I attempted to use the computer word processing program
to improve students’ writing ability although the measuring tool is the handwritten
assessment. Roblyer and Doering’s (2006) findings stated that prior experience and
writing ability of students may influence their choice of writing tools.
Fleisch-Kincaid readability level was the next component for them to use. The
students took the previously written essays and were instructed how to use the readability
tool to measure the difficulty (grade-level) of their writing along with other valuable
information this tool has to offer. The students were required to document these scores
(Flesch-Kincaid readability score) on a chart I made for this purpose. By using the
program the students were not only made aware of the number of paragraphs their essays
contained, it also made them aware of the number of the sentences per paragraph. This
was valuable information; in middle school we encourage students to write fiveparagraph essays with each paragraph consisting of 5-7 sentences.
The next tool to be utilized with this assignment was the essay grader (topics have
to be one of the essay grader’s selections). After the students were finished with their
typed essays I instructed them to copy and paste their essays into the essay grader
provided to us by our textbook company. The essay grader was provided as part of the
purchasing package and is suppose to be similar to the grading system used by the state
while giving the student feedback about the strengths and weaknesses of their writing.
The students were also required to chart the essay grader’s information on the chart with
the readability information. This would be another means to establish a baseline.
Motivating the Retained Student
52
The next assignment given to the students helped them to practice using another
tool of the word processor, the thesaurus or the synonym option. This activity’s purpose
was to show students how to increase their level of writing and to expose them to more
difficult words. This really wasn’t a writing assignment, but it assisted them later in
writing their essays on computers. To complete this assignment the students were given a
list of words and instructed how to right click at the end of the word to choose one that
might be a little more difficult. This also helped students learn how to vary their word
choices in their writing.
The final assignment, prior to the administration of the Georgia State Writing
Assessment, was another essay assignment to be completed in the computer lab. This
assignment differed from the previous essay assignment in that the topic was chosen by
the teacher (chosen from essay grader selections). The students did not have any prior
knowledge of the topic nor did they take any finished product into the lab as done with
the previous assignment. This required the students to organize and draft the essays at the
computer. Having to do the planning or the process of writing on the computers required
the students to practice steps in editing while typing. Revisions were done some of the
time, but students were less likely to reread and edit their work before turning it in. Joram
et al. (1990) explained that to write and revise effectively with a word-processing
program on the computer, one needs to know how to perform the physical procedures
involved in altering text. Again assistance was given as needed. Even though this is a
part of our technology curricula, certain basics of the program had to be explained to
some of my students. Basics such as copy and paste, inserting a line, or moving words
around, surprisingly weren’t known by all. Roblyer and Doering (2006) stated that many
Motivating the Retained Student
53
students needed to see and use word processing as a real and integral part of their writing.
This was done by using the word processor for essays. When the essays were completed
students used the Flesch-Kincaid readability level tool and charted this information
alongside previous essays’ readability statistics. The students turned in the printed essays
to be edited by the teacher. After making suggestions on editing the essays, they were
returned to the students for corrections. After suggested corrections were made the
students ran another Flesch-Kincaid readability level (to be recorded alongside previous
score for the same essay) along with the essay grader’s tool. Goldberg et al. (2003) metaanalysis conducted on studies from 1992-2002, did show positive correlations between
computer use and the length of writing, but mixed results when looking at the effect of
computer use on revision within the writing process. When the students took essays to
the lab already written on paper and typed them into the computer, they would always
comment on how short it looked when typed. Even if the minimal five paragraphs were
written, it “looked” too short so they would usually want to add to the essay. Hunter et al.
(2001) explains the misconception that composition length is meant to be a measure of
quality of writing; however, students who write more will eventually learn to write better.
So although the length added didn’t necessarily make their essays better, just the idea of
them more likely to write more frequently by using the computer was a positive.
In analyzing the first focus question I found an interesting concern in the
measurement of improvements in writing. Hunter et al. (2001) looked at the attitudes of
the students in determining the impact of word processing along with how improvements
are measured. They stated that methods to measure improvement should involve global
judgments by trained readers. Apparently this has been an issue in previous research
Motivating the Retained Student
54
when findings have looked for evidence of improvement. I felt confident in choosing the
state assessed test because this was not the case with it being read by trained readers.
Therefore my final outcome was not biased in any way and credibility in scores would be
assured.
For the analysis of the second focus question, “How do students feel about the
strategies implemented in order to motivate them to be active participants,” I used
quantitative data by using a Likert-scale type survey. The surveys consisted of 18
questions or items. A Chi-square was conducted to highlight both significant and nonsignificant items. Survey item 2 was found to be highly significant when 12 students or
60% agreed they were good spellers. One of the most useful components of the
Microsoft word processor that was utilized in the study was the spell checker. Also found
significant was survey item 18 when 13 students or 65% answered “Pretty good” when
asked about rating their typing skills. Having students feel their typing skills are “pretty
good” could act as a positive when typing essays and as it was observed, very few did
struggle with the actual typing. Surprisingly Survey item 10 was insignificant. Item 10
stated, “I don’t like to type my essays on computer.” No significant number of students
responded at either end, but responses were evenly distributed between “strongly
disagree” and “strongly agree.” Survey items 1 and 11 were no surprise at the
insignificance. Item 1 being, “I don’t think I write well as other people.” Responses were
mostly distributed between “strongly disagree” and “disagree.” Item 11 stated, “Writing
is a lot of fun.” Responses were evenly distributed meaning not a significant amount
really felt strongly one way or the other between “strongly disagreed” and “strongly
agreed.” Therefore the data for Items 1, 10 and 11 were not useful. Other helpful
Motivating the Retained Student
55
observations gathered from the survey; most disagreed they write short, choppy
sentences, (12 out of 19), as well as having grammar problems, (11 out of 19).
Next, to determine the internal consistency reliability of the items on the survey
given to students, the Cronbach’s Alpha test was conducted using the survey responses.
The purpose of this test was to correlate the score for each item with the total score for
each student in order to make sure the survey items measured only what they were
intended to measure. This was reassuring when Cronbach’s Alpha was α = .83.
Therefore the survey showed a high level of reliability using the Cronbach’s Alpha test.
Motivation is a science with this class. What motivates the group one year may
not the next. The group dynamics is very important from year to year and we seem to be
perfecting this process continually. Then again, some years it is out of our control.
Psychologists and educators have long considered the role of motivation in student
achievement and learning. However Pintrich and Linnenbrink (2002) explained that
since the 1980’s there has been a focus on how motivational and cognitive factors interact
and influence student learning and achievement. Cognitive factors referred to the ability
to learn while motivational factors referred to the desire to learn. Lumsden (1994)
discussed students’ motivation to learn. She explained that as children grow, their
passion for learning frequently seems to shrink. Being a teacher of adolescents I
experience this first hand. Lumsden (1994) explained the two types of motivation of
students, intrinsic and extrinsic. She explains that an intrinsically motivated student
undertakes an activity for the enjoyment it provides, the learning it permits, or the feeling
of accomplishment it evokes. The extrinsically motivated student, according to Lumsden
(1994), is the one that performs in order to obtain a reward or avoid some punishment,
Motivating the Retained Student
56
such as grades, stickers, or teacher approval. Although I have a point system to earn
privileges, some of my students are intrinsically motivated.
Cordaro (2009) questioned how are educators to understand student motivation to
write? They found that self-efficacy, defined as a person’s perceptions of his/her own
ability is a major component at the center of studies. Cordaro (2009) goes on to say that
with the right design and methodology, student motivation should and can be empirically
researched with useful outcomes. I found using the word processor to enable the students
to write better was a motivational factor. Using the Flesch-Kincaid readability score also
help the students in self-monitoring as they changed words and phrases to seek higher
scores.
Research shows students need to feel a sense of ownership in their learning and
understand the purpose and process of their writing. When students believe they are
good writers they have the confidence to write. My students that normally would be
reluctant to write were not when they were at the computer. Graham et al. (2004) stress
the importance of students writing and not always given short answers. I agree with this
and by using the word processor program, I feel more writing can be done in a shorter
period of time.
Hunter et al. (2001) stated that they found a number of writers report increases in
motivation and enthusiasm for writing and others have indicated that students using word
processors desire to write more often. This is exactly what I wanted from my students; to
get them to desire to write more often, therefore, they would become better writers. I feel
the use of the word processor can do this. As explained by Graham and Perin (2007), it is
Motivating the Retained Student
57
essential that teachers take the time to develop the writer in every child. Explicit and
systematic instruction is an integral part of the writing process.
Focus Question three was, “How will change be successfully implemented in
convincing stakeholders to accept the writing instructional strategies based on the
findings in this study,” used qualitative data. Questionnaires were filled out by 8th grade
language arts teachers as well as one language arts academic coach. The questions were
in regards to: changes in the way writing is taught, how to make teaching writing easier,
grading writing, and opinions of the effectiveness of using computers to write. The
answers were then examined for common themes.
Improving schools involves change. Change, however, described by BoydDimock (1992) is not an isolated process, it occurs within the same context, the school.
The effect of the change on all parts of the school has to be considered; each part is
dependent upon the other and must be done properly. Everyone involved must be just
that, involved. The teachers in this research answered questionnaires giving their
opinions of teaching writing using the computers. While one stated as long as the writing
process didn’t get lost, another stated it would certainly help in grading and giving
feedback. So basically teachers were in favor of using the word processor to teach
writing. Contrary to Gusky (2002) who noted that most significant changes in teachers’
attitudes and beliefs come after they begin using a new practice successfully and see
changes in student learning. These teachers understand how computers are such a huge
part of students’ lives that using the computer to write really makes more sense.
Common themes discovered from the questionnaires for the teachers’ answers
were portfolio implementation, writing across the curriculum, consistency with other
Motivating the Retained Student
58
grade levels, and focusing on the process. The themes discovered from the teachers were
not surprising. Having attended collaborative planning on a weekly basis, these issues
have come up. Implementing portfolios would have to be a vertical move with 6th and 7th
grade involved but could be implemented. Writing across the curriculum is improving
with the implementation of “Writing to Win.” This also helps with the consistency
between grade levels. However, “Writing to Win” is not an essay style of writing. It is a
program intended to increase the student’s comfort level with writing. In addressing the
concern of focusing on the process of writing, it was suggested that teachers utilize a
variety of pre-writing instruments. Keeping the process of writing was mentioned when
also asked about making teaching writing easier. The academic coach plans to continue
to offer a variety of graphic organizers and pre-writing instruments.
As part of focus question 3, the curriculum administrator was interviewed. After
the interview was conducted common themes between the teachers and administrator
were discovered. They were: (1) writing across the curriculum, (2) implementing the
“Writing to Win” program, and (3) the practicality of students using computers to write.
Evidence of the research conducted as observed did agree with Roblyer and Doering
(2006), giving good reasons why teachers use word processing to teach writing. They
explained how it saves teachers time by letting students modify materials instead of
creating new ones. Teachers using the computers to teach writing will be more capable of
editing assignments to assist students in corrections. Grading “turn around” time is often
an issue. Computers do assist in this.
Both teachers and the administrator felt that writing across the curriculum was
extremely important for the students to write in all classes, but both agreed the
Motivating the Retained Student
59
implementation of the process should continue to fall on the language arts teachers to
ensure the focus on the mechanics of grammar. The administrator and teachers both
agreed the “Writing to Win” strategy was effective in consistency throughout grade
levels. Both teachers and administrator also agreed on the effectiveness of the strategies
in helping reluctant writers. The administrator was told about the study and implementing
the use of the word processor program to write essays. Although she agreed it would
benefit students in the future and help teachers with giving timely feed-back, she stated
that with the number of students compared to the number of computer labs, it wouldn’t be
very practical for a whole grade. However, she did state that with a program of 8.5, not
involving as many students, this could be the key to motivation.
A starting point of any change is a clear vision. Boyd-Dimock (1992) explains
that a vision serves as a marker pointing to where an organization needs to go, a picture
of the future for which people are willing to work. The problem with implementing any
change now would be financially. As stated by the administrator in the interview,
“Considering all of the students we have compared to the number of computers, if a grade
level tried this we might have a problem. However, if a group such as 8.5 wanted to try it,
we could certainly see how it went. Anything to motivate this group would be worth it.”
Mendez-Morse (1993) compared the vision of an administrator to that of a teacher by
illustrating how administrators’ visions have to encompass the whole system while
teachers’ visions are more individualized or specific to their classrooms. I must admit
this vision would benefit my classroom.
Motivating the Retained Student
60
Discussion
The results of this study basically showed the use of Microsoft word processor to
teach writing made no significant difference as measured by writing scores. With the 8.5
classes, it is really hard to explain scores, whether it is gains or losses. One must ask if
the simple fact of retention motivated them a little more, or maybe the fact they were
taking a similar test and knew what to expect, thus relieving some anxiety. Or does it
effect the student’s performance knowing that it really “doesn’t matter” what their score,
s/he will go to the next grade? In my class I realize how important motivation is.
Referring back to the literature, I do use both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. I have a
point system that comes with privileges. I try to offer extra privileges that will motivate
students to finish their assignments. I also emphasize changing work habits or correcting
what might have retained the student in the first place. I encourage my students to
complete assignments and show improvement throughout the year.
I think I would have had better results if I could have spent more time with my
students using the computers to write. This study stretched over a period of about 3
weeks. Because of computer lab scheduling issues, I wasn’t able to reserve the lab for
many consecutive days. Although the 2010-11 scores’ mean dropped from 204 to 202,
this was not a significant dropped. Examining the scores closer, the total drop was 75
points where the total gain was 63. The most points a student’s score decreased was 20
points, two students lost 20 points each. One student was serving in-school-suspension 3
days that we were in the lab typing. I cannot explain the other student’s decrease. Total
point increase was 63. The most a student’s score increased was 21 points. This student
has shown much improvement throughout the year. She was a good example of being a
Motivating the Retained Student
61
good writer just needing the assistance of spell check, grammar check and other tools
offered by the word processor. Out of the 13 students, 6 scores decreased while 7
increased.
When my students went to the lab to type their essays, I felt it was very important
for them to chart their scores before and after they edited using teacher’s suggestions.
Using the Flesch-Kincaid tools, they enjoyed seeing the grade level of their writing, but it
was evident that the program’s capabilities to count words, paragraphs and sentences
were more helpful. I did find a flaw in the readability formula because it counted
syllables of words and scored the writing at a grade level accordingly. When students
would forget to space between words the green line would appear and at times they
ignored this cue. Flesh-Kincaid still counted the long group of letters as a single word
with multiple syllables. Flesch-Kincaid grade level readability formula is inbuilt within
the Microsoft word application. However, Microsoft word doesn’t score above grade 12
and any grade above 12 will be reported as grade 12. Also while editing these essays, I
noticed the over usage of the synonym feature, shown to them previously in Microsoft
word, because larger words they chose really didn’t make sense in some sentences.
Using the Flesch-Kincaid readability score also helped the students in self-monitoring as
they changed words and phrases to seek higher scores.
The Holt Reinhart Winston essay grader was not as reliable as I had hoped.
Topics for the essay -grader to grade are limited to what the website, my.hrw.com., has to
offer. Also each essay can only be scored once per student so a student is unable to edit
his/her writing then try to rescore. Another flaw I found was sometimes the essay grader
would say “processing” and never actually score the essay so that particular student was
Motivating the Retained Student
62
unable to receive a score. If I tried to resend, it would say it had already been scored. I
read the essays and scored them for myself and found that I disagreed with several of the
scores. I wrote my scores on their charts alongside the grader’s scores. I found that the
grader looked for certain words to “persuade” or “explain” but did not grade as heavily
on content as the state does on the state assessment. Some essays were considered
“unscorable” when they did not contain the right choice of words to persuade or explain
although I considered them to be persuasive but maybe not with a solid argument. Others
scored a 1 or 2. This is when I had to give a pep talk and discuss what they could have
done differently because this was very discouraging to the students. Others scored a 3 or
4 that I really could not understand. On the other hand, the essay-grader did have some
helpful links for the students to use. When students signed in (and everyone had a 10
digit login code) they were given choices to click where they could read some prewriting
tips, revision tips or even a selection of graphic organizers appropriate for the type of
writing they were trying to accomplish. After the students had submitted their essays, the
grader gave them very detailed reports on their writings. It gave them a Holistic Score,
which stated a reason why they might have scored what they did. The explanation might
say something like, “This response demonstrates limited success with the persuasive
writing task.” It also gave the students an Analytic Feedback telling students what they
were graded on such as “content and development” and “focus and organization” and
explained each individually along with suggestions to the students. Of course every
essay that scored a 1, 2, 3 or 4 received the same comments as others scoring the same,
however the student rarely made it passed reading their scores. I did attempt to show
them the comments and explained how to apply them to the next selection of writing.
Motivating the Retained Student
63
This was a unique, teachable moment. Overall, the lab experiences were motivating for
my students.
The surveys given to students were a bit confusing. They didn’t seem to match the
verbal answers/attitudes I took away from the focus group discussion. Some students had
questions about the survey as to what exactly was I asking. In retrospect I would have
either worded the questions clearer or changed the Likert-scale to choose from. I also
questioned the number of items my surveyed contained. I think maybe it was too many.
According to the surveys given to the students, only five students out of twenty disagreed
or strongly disagreed with the statement, “I don’t like to type my essays on the
computer.” In the focus group conducted with students they named many advantages of
typing essays on computers. During the focus group I don’t recall anyone saying they did
not want to type their essays. As time passed, I did see my students more focused on
completing the assignments than being caught up in the details of the word processor.
The questionnaires given to the teachers were very encouraging. I work with a
young group of teachers, none close to retiring. I feel this group of teachers still seek
new and motivating strategies to help them teach language arts. The questionnaires were
also very enlightening. I thought the portfolio idea, following the students from grade to
grade, was good and doable. However, although we have implemented the “Writing to
Win” program in the county, some teachers are not quite sold on it, but of course they
still use it. One disadvantage with “Writing to Win” is the responses do not always
require essay form. Some are writing prompts with really short responses. So we would
have to choose carefully for portfolios writings. However, it seems to be effective in
Motivating the Retained Student
64
increasing students’ comfort levels to write and because it is done three to four times a
week, it allows the teacher to know the student better as a writer.
This study ensured credibility through the use of multiple sources, surveys,
questionnaires, interview, and focus groups. I feel by choosing the state assessed test it
made my argument more credibly solid because the essays were read by trained readers.
Therefore my final outcome was not biased in any way. I was successful in finding
opposing views, with word processing being a fairly older program of our computers the
literature was dated in the late 1980’ and 1990’s. More recent literature concerning
technology and our teens expressed concerns of teens using technology in such a way that
may have negative effects on their writing ability. Many social networks have blossomed
in the late 2000’s and yes our children do use computers but exactly what features do
they use? When communicating with someone on one of the social networks, word
processing is not required and texting does bleed over into students’ formal writing.
Technology such as texting, emails, instant messaging, and social networks are teens’
main source of communication. This use of technology encourages us to shorten and
misspell words as well as use abbreviations. There is a concern of its ramifications on
the writing of our teens as they make the transition from the informal to the formal
writing. This adds justification for the need to use the computer word processor
programs to assist writing: mistakes can be instantly flagged for corrections.
Implications
The themes of this study were motivation to write, self-monitoring for
improvement, and self-efficacy. This study was valid because the class was taught at the
same time everyday with the same students as participants. The study shaped and
Motivating the Retained Student
65
transformed my participants by exposing them to features of the word processor that
many were not aware existed. Motivation of students to use computer labs originally
appeared to be an “adventure” or a reason to leave the classroom, but ended up with
products the students were proud of. I have confidence this study made my students
more aware of themselves as writers. I observed some of them really becoming confident
and not embarrassed of their works. The student who would normally struggle with
spelling was less reluctant for anyone to read his/her writing. The student who also wrote
almost illegibly was not ashamed to have his/her paper read as well. The evidence of the
study being impactful was seen when the effects of implementing the word processor was
observed to motivate and attempt to improve writing.
Referential adequacy of this research is determined by the capability of students
being able to use the word processor in any class that teachers require essays, research, or
reports. The tools of the word processor could be used along with the Fleisch-Kincaid
reading ease tool aiming for the level of writing recommended which is 60-70,
considered “standard” on the difficulty scale. However, the essay grader could not easily
be used because of the limitation of topics. The research could be useful to others and
even increase understanding and raise motivation especially with a group of students that
are retained. The study transformed me as a teacher to see that writing is truly a
continuing process and that I must enable my students to see how essay writing can
always be improved.
Impact on School Improvement
When the administrator was interviewed and told about the study of implementing
the use of the word processor program to write essays, she had concerns. Although she
Motivating the Retained Student
66
agreed it would benefit students in the future and help teachers with giving timely feedback, she stated that with the number of students compared to the number of computer
labs, it wouldn’t be very practical for a whole grade. Then she was told how this would
start with 8.5 and hopefully grow, the administrator stated that with a program of 8.5, not
involving as many students, this could be the key to success and motivating this group of
students is always a challenge.
Understanding how and why students are motivated for school achievement can
be the key to success with any grade level. Students need to write to improve not simply
for a grade but to achieve the process of writing. There is little interest in writing if they
are only writing for a grade.
When the academic coach was told of the study, she was unaware of the essay
grader. She was very excited to hear the components of it and quite concerned when told
of the outcomes and flaws in using the grader. But the academic coach was so interested
in the use of the grader that she used one of the topics from the Holt Reinhart Winston’s
essay grader choices for the county’s all-write. By doing so, my class was able to copy
and paste their essays into the essay grader. This allowed us to look at the product given
to us by the company and analyze it for effectiveness. One advantage of the grader is the
record keeping for each student; it is done by the grader. A teacher can look at any essay
a student has submitted for the entire year and easily spot progress throughout the year.
Also a teacher could see if a certain type of essay was more likely to be problematic for
students.
At the end of the school year a colleague of mine said she had heard about the
essay grader and was planning to use it next year to assist her in reading and grading the
Motivating the Retained Student
67
essays. So I do feel I have accomplished something if I brought to light strategies
unknown to other teachers and for them to desire to use the computers to teach writing.
A major concern with this once again is computer lab scheduling and giving the students
adequate time in the labs to finish essays and advance in their writing abilities.
Recommendations for Future Research
By doing this study I gained the knowledge and appreciation for research. In the
past when I read literature that involved any kind of research I did not have any idea what
all it entailed. I also learned to be more aware of validity of research, to recognize
credible sources. In carrying out the steps involved made me more aware of the
importance of keeping data. Data is something that I plan to work with more to track
improvement of my students.
Looking back on the findings, I must say the results were somewhat unexpected.
I would have loved to reject the null hypotheses. I feel if I could have devoted more time
to the students’ writing using the computer, the results may have been different. The
results of the surveys were also somewhat unexpected. Certain questions regarding
interest in using computers were not as I would have thought.
I plan to continue to use the word processor in years to come to teach writing. I
would like to start at the first of the year with a computer literacy test to see exactly what
my students do not know about Microsoft Word. I also plan to require the students to
chart progress for self-monitoring.
My recommendation for further research would be to use a larger group if
scheduling permits. This would also enhance credibility of the study. Furthermore, it
would be interesting to correlate student writing achievement to owning computers. See
Motivating the Retained Student
68
if students who have computers at home tend to be better writers. In the end, I feel I have
learned a lot about myself and my students through this research and will forever
remember this study.
Motivating the Retained Student
69
References
Borgia, E., & Schuler, D., (1996). Action Research in Early Childhood Education. ERIC
Digest. pp. 1-7. Retrieved from ERIC database.
Boyd-Dimock, V. (1992). School context: bridge or barrier to change? Austin,
TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. 2(2).
Charles, C., & Mertler, C.(2002). Introduction to educational research (4th ed.). Boston:
Allyn & Bacon.
Cordaro, D. (2009). Motivating students to write: some empirical answers (and
questions). Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language,
Composition, and Culture, 9(2), pp. 361-367. DOI:10.1215/15314200-2008-038.
Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research; planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (1998). Handbook of Qualitative Research 2nd ed. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Eisner, E. (1991). The enlightened eye. New York: MacMillian Publications.
Fullan, M, (1992), Visions that blind. Educational Leadership. 49(5), 19-20.
Georgia Department of Education. (2009). Atlanta: Georgia DOE. www.doe.k12.ga
Graham, S., Harris, K., & MacArthur, C. (2004). The power of word processing.
Renaissance Learning. Retrieved from
http://doc.renlearn.com/KMNet/R004215628GH546B.pdf
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of
adolescents in middle and high schools-A report to Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Washington , D.C: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Motivating the Retained Student
70
Guskey, T. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and
Teaching: Theory and practice 8(3/4), 381-391. Retrieved from
http://physics.gmu.edu/~hgeller/TeacherWorkshop/Guskey2002.pdf
Hord, S. (2000). Strategies for Change; implementing a comprehensive school reform
program. CSRD Connections, 1(2), 1-12. Retrieved November 22, 2010, from
http://www.sedl.org/csrd/connections/april2000
Hunter, W. Jardine, G. Rilstone,P. & Weisgerber, R. (2001). The Effects of using word
processors: A hard look at the research. The Writing Notebook, 8(1), 42-46.
Retrieved from http://people.ucalgary.ca/~hunter/writ.html
Jackowski-Bartol, T. R. (2001). The impact of word processing on middle school
students. ERIC, Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED453825
Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research quantitative, qualitative,
and mixed approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Joram, E., Woodruff, E., Lindsay, P., & Bryson, M. (1990). Students' editing skills and
attitudes toward word procesing. Computers and Composition, 7(3), 55-72.
Retrieved from http://computersandcomposition.osu.edu/html/history.htm
Kvale, S. & Brinkman, S. (2009). Interview, learning the craft of qualitative research
interviewing. Thousands Oak, CA: Sage Publications.
LaGrange College Education Department. (2009). Conceptual framework. LaGrange,
GA: LaGrange College.
Lenhart, A., Arafeh, S., Smith, A., & Macgill, A. (2008, April 24). Writing, technology
and teens. Retrieved from Pew Internet & American Life Project:
Motivating the Retained Student
71
http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2008/PIP_Writing_Report_FINAL3.
Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative research in education, a user’s guide. Thousands Oak,
CA: Sage Publications.
Lumsden, L. (1994). Student motivation to learn. ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational
Management. Retrieved from http://www.ericdigests.org/1995-1/learn.htm
Marshall, H. (1987). Motivational Strategies of Three Fifth-Grade Teachers. The
Elementary School Journal. 88(2). 135-50.
Mendez-Morse, S. (1993). Vision, Leadership, and Change. Issues… about Change, 2(3),
Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges. (2003). The
neglected “R”: The need for a writing revolution. New York: College Board.
Pintrich & Linnenbrink (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School
Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-326.
Powell, K C., Kalina, & Cody J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: developing
tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241-250.
Roblyer, M., & Doering, A (2006). The impact of word processing in education. Pearson
Allyn Bacon Prentice Hall.
Salkind, N. (2007). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics (Excel 2nd Ed.)
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Skrla, L., McKenzie, K., & Scheurich, J. (2009). Using equity audits to create equitable
an excellent schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stockmeyer, N., (2009, January). Using microsoft word’s readability program. Michigan
Bar Journal, Retrieved from http://www.michbar.org/journal/pdf/pdf4article1467
Motivating the Retained Student
72
Way, W. D., Davis, L. L., & Strain-Seymour, E. (2008). The validity case for assessing
direct writing by computer. A Pearson Assessments & Information White Paper.
Zeph, L. (1985). A qualitative evaluation process for educational programs serving
Handicapped students in rural areas. Research in Rural Education, 3(1). 13-18.
Motivating the Retained Student
Appendix A
Student Focus Group Questions
1. What do you think about using computers to write essays?
2. How do you feel about someone grading your writing?
3. How would you teach writing if you were the teacher?
73
Motivating the Retained Student
74
Appendix B
Student Survey
SELECT ONLY ONE RESPONSE TO EACH
QUESTION.
Strongly
disagree
disagree
agree
Strongly
agree
1. I don’t think I write as well as other
people.
2. I think I am a good speller.
3. My paragraphs are not long enough.
4. I feel confident in the length of my
paragraphs.
5. I write well developed sentences
6. I feel confident in my ability to
clearly express my ideas in writing.
7. I have grammar problems in my
writing.
8. I am very confident in my computer
skills.
9. I avoid writing.
10. I don’t like to type my essays on the
computer.
11. Writing is a lot of fun.
12. I have no fear of my writing being
evaluated
13. I am very confident in my ability to
write.
14. I am a poor speller.
15. I like to write in my free time.
16. My sentences are short and choppy.
17. How often do you use Microsoft Often
Someword or some other word processing
times
product?
18. How would you rate your typing Fast and Pretty
skills?
error free
good
Rarely
never
Avera
ge
lousy
Adapted from sources: Daly & Miller test online, retrieved from: http://www.csus.edu/ indiv/s/stonem/The%20Daly-iller%20Test.htm
Student Motivation Survey Self-Assessment, Smart and Cool America, assessed online from
www.assessmentgenerator.com/.../cRboslearn117190407.html
Motivating the Retained Student
75
Appendix C
Interview Questions for Administrators
1. As a principal how do you expect writing to be taught in your school?
2. What do you feel is the teacher’s role in teaching writing?
3. As a principal, what problems do you see teachers experience in teaching writing?
4. How do you feel about implementing change in the way writing in taught to 8.5?
5. How do you feel the results of this study will affect the teaching of writing?
Motivating the Retained Student
76
Appendix D
Teacher Focus Group Questions
1. Do you feel changes are needed in the way writing is taught?
2. What could make teaching writing easier?
3. Do you feel every writing assignment should be graded?
4. In your opinion, how effective would it be to use computers to help teach writing?