The effect of short writing activities on writing apprehension and achievement of middle school students

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The effect of short writing activities on writing apprehension and achievement of middle school students
Physical Description:
xii, 160 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Kaywell, Joan F., 1956-
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Written communication -- Study and teaching -- Psychological aspects   ( lcsh )
Junior high school students -- Effect of anxiety on   ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1987.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 150-158).
Statement of Responsibility:
by Joan F. Kaywell.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 001030989
notis - AFB3121
oclc - 18145404
System ID:
AA00002154:00001

Full Text













THE EFFECT OF SHORT WRITING ACTIVITIES
ON WRITING APPREHENSION AND ACHIEVEMENT
OF MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS


JOAN


F. KAYWELL


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED T
OF THE UNIVERSITY
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOC


O THE GRADUATE SC
OF FLORIDA IN
THE REQUIREMENTS
TOR OF PHILOSOPHY


UNIVERSITY


OF FLORIDA


1987


HOOL























To my


late mother,


Grace


H. Kaywell,


for her belief


that


mother was


would


involved


finish


in a


this


fatal


project.
car accident


before


chapter


Among h
holders;


things


there


four was


were


are five


five


completed.
black fabrihide


children


sheet


in the family.


oldest


brother'


was


obvious


life
that


history was


recorded


she had intentions


in one,


of writing


book
like


for each
a second


have


this


us.


The completion


birth for me,
dissertation b


and it is


,ound


of this


study


intention


in the book mother


intended for me.













ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


One of


the best


parts


a dissertation


is thanking everyone


involved


in its


writing.


first


thank


you goes


to Dr. Theodore


Hipple


for urging me


to start


the doctoral


program and


to my


friend,


Christine


Clifford,


gave


me the push


that


actually


me started.


Next


sincere


appreciation


is expressed


to all who have


guided a

graduate


nd encouraged me


study


from


to the present.


very


beginning


Especially


am grateful


advanced

1 to those


who were members


doctoral


supervisory


committee:


chai rman,


Dr. H. Thompson


Fillmer,


and co-chairman,


Dr. Robert


Wright,


B. Damico

knowledge


for their


suggestions,


and Dr. Forrest


and time;


concern,


W. Parkay


and Dr. Eugene


and kindness


for their

A. Todd fo


Dr. Sandra


contribution


r his guidance


of

and


patience.


particularly wish


to thank


the entire


faculty


of the


College of


Education


at the University


of Florida,


specifically


Dr. Mary Grace Kantowski

longstanding contribution


and Dr. Elroy


J. Bolduc,


to my professional


growth


maturity.













A special


thank


is extended


to the teachers


, parent


volunteers,


and 236 students


from Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


participated

addition, I


in the study


wish


and helped make my


to acknowledge


dream a


the assistance of


reality.


the faculty


students


of Kathleen


High


School


, particularly


Willie


M. Speed,


Principal,

Thanks


whose


cooperation made


are also


in order


the pilot

my graduate


study possible.

student friends:


Kenneth


"Woody"


Clark,


Bob Melczarek,


Kitty


Fouche,


Deke


Mason,


Beth


Downs,


Linda


Kramer


and Bob Carroll.


Special


thanks


extended


to Susan Maida and


Paula


who were


there


for me


those


"bad"


days


and kept


me going.


Finally,


wish


to express


my deepest


appreciation


to my


family who


has provided


me with constant


love


and support,


particularly


to my


father,


Bernard


E. Kaywell


for his belief


me always.


are














TABLE


OF CONTENTS


Page


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


* * iii


LIST OF


TABLES.


. . * * viii


ABSTRACT. . . .

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION. .

Statement of the Problem .
Statement of Purpose .
Statement of Hypotheses.
Need for the Study .


Delimitations.
Limitations .
Definitions of
Summary. .


* S 9 9 9
* 0 0 0 4


Terms


. 5 0 9 0 a *


) )




* a 0 0 *
* 0 0 * *
* 4 0 4 9 9 * *
* 0 4 4 0 9 * *
* * * *
* 0 C 4 *
* 4 0 0 0 9 * *


* 0 *


CHAP TER


REVIEW


OF RELATED


LITERATURE.


Need


for the Improvement


Writing.


0 4 0 18


Problems Re
Writing S
The Paper
Teachers"


lated
kills


Load


Belief


to Improving Students'
0 0 9 0 0 9 0 * *


0 0 0 * *


in Grammar


Instruction.


as Writing
a S * *


Frequency
Writing A
The Dev


in Writing
apprehension


elopment


* 0 0 0 S
* 0 4 0 4


of the Construct


* * *
* 9 *
* 0 0 4 9 *


The Predictive


Validity


of the Writing


Apprehension Measure
Writing Apprehension a
Writing Achievement.


* 4 4 0
.s it Relates
. .


0 9 0 *


0 5 * *


Changing


Writing


Apprehension.


Some


Possible


Causes


of Apprehension


The Effects
Attitude
Summary. .


of Teaching


Toward


Writing.


Correctness


. 0 0 0 0


. 0 0 9 5 4 *


Student
0


* 0 * *


CHAPTER


RESEARCH


DESIGN


AND METHODOLOGY


9 49


Design of


the Study.


4 * *


w w T










Writing


Sele
Data


action


Achievement
of Readers


election


* p S 4 4 4 .
* S 9 9 *
I
) 1 I


Procedure


. P 0 0 4 0


The Rating


Procedure


Data


Analysis


. 9 P P 0 0 0 P 4 P 0 P *


CHAPTER IV


DATA ANALYSIS


RESULTS


OF THE


STUDY.


. . . . .. 71


The Statis


tical


Treatment


the Data


Introduction


. 9 0 0 . 4 P 9 71


Writing
Analvsi


Writing Ac
Comparison


Apprehension


f Apprehension
hievement. .


. P 0 4 0 P P P *


Data


Raters


Anal


Post


s of Compo
Analysis.


sition


Data


9 P P P 0 P 0 0 *


Summary.


P 4 9 4 P P 4 P P P P 4 0 88


CHAPTER


SUMMARY,


CONCLUSIONS


RECOMMENDATIONS


Summary. .
Conclusions.
Writing Ap
Writing Ac


Post


P 0 P 0 4 P P 0


a a 0 0 P P P 4 4 P 4 P * *


prehension
hievement.


Hoc Conclusions


Discussion


Recommendations.


* P 4 9 9 4 P *

* P 4 S P 9 4 P 9 0 *
0000000800000I
I O 0 O I0 O
)I I O


* 0 I P 0 0 0 P *
* S S P 4 P P *


S. . . . 101


Future


Research


Inquiri


4 4 0 4 P 0 P 4 102


APPENDIX


Short


Writing


Activities.


P . . I05


APPENDIX


Writing Apprehension Measure.


. . 115


APPENDIX


Paul


Diederich


Essay


Rating


Scale


. . 117


APPENDIX


Teacher


Instructions


Middle


School.


. 122


APPENDIX E


Directions


to be Read


to Students


Pre-


and Post-


. . 124


APPENDIX F


Pilot


Study


4 . . . 127


APPENDIX G


Language
Middle


Arts


School


Program


Fort


Clarke


. . . . 133


APPENDIX H


Parental


Consent


Form


P . . 135









APPENDIX J


Pre-


and Postwriting


Achievement


Scores


Group


. . . . 143


APPENDIX K


Responses
Asked b


to Apprehension


Researcher


Questions


at Study's


End.


APPENDIX


Responses
Asked b


to Achievement


Researcher


Questions


at Study's


End.


REFERENCES. . . . . *

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . .













LIST OF


TABLES


Table


Page


Composition


Grade


of Subj


Sample


and Sex


by
I * *


Compo
Grade


sition


of Subj


and Race


Sample


S * *


Composition


of Subject


Sample


by Group.


. 57


Total


Pre-


and Postappr


ehension


Scores


by Group


Pre-
Grade


and Grade.


and Postapprehension Means


Level


S 9 5 * *


Summar

Summar
Group


of MANCOVA Postapprehension


MANCOVA Postapprehension


- Grade


S 0 9


*


by
a *


Summary


MANCOVA P


ostapprehension


High Apprehensives


Rater


Reliability


. 5 9 S S S 0 9 81


Pre-
Grade


and P


ostachievement


Level


Summary of


Summary


Means


. * 82


MANCOVA Postachievement.


of MANCOVA Pos


* . 83


achievement


High Apprehensives


I * *


Pre-


and Pos


apprehension


and Achieve-


ment Means


. S S * *


4-11


Summary


of Findi


ngs by


Grade


Level


. 88


Summary of


to Hypotheses


the Relationship


Grade


Level


of Findings
0 9 0 5 5 5 5


Grouo


Differences


For Variable











Group


Comparisons


For Postachievement


High Apprehensives.


. . . . 132


Pre-


and Postwriting


Apprehension


Scores


roup


S. a a a 138


Pre- and Postwriting Achievement


cores


Group


S .


S. . . 143


Responses


to Apprehension


Researcher


Responses


at Study'


to Achievement


Researcher


at Study's


stions


End. .

Questions
End. .


Asked


Sa a .


Asked


.











Abstract


of Dissertation


Presented


to the Graduate


School


of the


University


of Florida


in Partial


Fulfillment


of the Requirements


for the Degree


Doctor


Philosophy


EFFECT OF


SHORT WRITING ACTIVITIES


ON WRITING


APPREHENSION AND


OF MIDDLE


SCHOOL


ACHIEVEMENT


STUDENTS


Joan


August,


Kaywell

1987


Chairman:


Dr. H.


Co-Chairman:


Thompson


Robert


Fillmer
Wright


Maj or


Department


Instruction


and Curriculum


The purpose of


this


research


was to investigate


the effect


of short


writing


activities


(SWAs)


on students'


writing


apprehension and


achievement


with


special


emphasis


on initially


high


apprehensive


students.


Writing


apprehension


levels were


measured


the Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure.


Writing


achievement


was measured


the holistic


evaluation of


compositions.


The apprehension measure


and composition


were


completed


221 middle


school


students


control


and two


experimental


groups)


at the beginning


and ending


of a six-week


period.


two experimental


groups


one


without


feedback


(Exl)


one with


returned


dail


feedback

y during


(Ex2),

this s


wrote


tame


a SWA which


six-week


was collected


period.









seventh,


and eighth grades


differences among


the (H1)


There

posttest


will


writing


no significant

apprehension scores


and (H3)

and Ex2


posttest

students:


writing a

and there


achievement


will


scores


no significant


the Control


diff


, Exl,


erences


among


the (H


posttest


writing


apprehension


scores


and (H4)


posttest


writing


achievement


scores


of initially


high


apprehensive


Control,


Exl,


and Ex2 students.


The null


hypotheses


were


retained


for all conditions


except


for apprehension


levels


of seventh graders


in Exi.


At the


seventh grade

significantly

Examination o

apprehension


the frequent


reduced stu

f the trend

was slightly


use of


dents


SWAs


level


scores


reduced


reveal


using


with


no feedback


writing

4d that


either


apprehension.

students"


experimental


method


investigated.


There


were


no significant


differences


between experimental


and control


groups


on overall


quality


posttest


compositions.


More


writing


research


apprehension


needs


while


to be done


increasing


concerning


achievement.


the reduction


Post


findings


at the middle


school


were


consistent


with


research


findings


at the college


level


which suggest


that


apprehension


assoc


iated


with writing


performance.


means


of high,


moderate


and low


appre


hensive


students


were


compared


with


their


respective


achievement


scores


in writing.


every


instance,


direction of


the means was


in accord


with


what


previous


research


C -





1


I


I


-- A









apprehensives,


and moderate


apprehensives


write


papers


of lower


quality


than do


low apprehensive.















CHAPTER


INTRODUCTION


Anyone

apprehension


writes


toward


has experienced


the writing


task.


some


degree


It makes


no difference


a person


is skilled


or unskilled


, practiced


or unpracticed,


writing

some, p


often


produces


perceived


exorbitant


negatively.


degrees


The act of


of writing


writing,


apprehension--one


common manifestation of


a negative


attitude


toward


writing.


these


students


interferes


small


with


amounts


the research


is clear


the development


of writing


writing


of writing


anxiety may


apprehension


skills


necessary


Granted,

to produce


piece of


quality writing


although


the optimal


level may vary


from


person


person


and situation


situation.


English


teachers,


the nature of


their


jobs,


should


have


their


students


write


as much


as possible.


a large


proportion


of this writing


is some variation on


the five-paragraph


theme,


essay,


or term


paper,


writing


assignments


become


burdensome


tasks


for students


and teachers.


Students


should


be writing


daily


when one


considers


long


it takes


to grade


a class


set of


lengthy


papers,


teachers


can hardly


be expected


to handle


more


than one


these


assignments


week.


There


pressure










on teachers to have

quantity will affect


students write


quality


more


but longer


in the hopes

assignment s


that

are humanly


impossible.


In addition,


students


participating


solely


in these


kinds


of long


assignments


tend


to view writing


simply


classroom exercises


devoid


real


world


significance.


Objectives


in most


writing


programs


can be achieved


frequent


use of


short


, manageable writing


activities.


Students


can finish a short


assignment


without


many


of the problems


associated


with


the writing


of long


papers.


Students


are less


likely


to make


false


starts


use faulty


organization and


logic,


or commit


numerous


grammar


usage


errors


primarily


because of


nature


of the task.


Students


can


share


their


writing


quickly


with


others


in the class,


creating


a sense


of excitement


that


eminates

activity

to signif


from a

require

v that


common writing

s only minimal

the activity h


experience.


grad ing;


as been


A short


a check


completed


writing


in the gradebook

is sufficient.


short


writing


activities


included


in this


study


share


useful


features:


they


are fun,


practical,


easy


to use (see


Appendix A for


a complete


list).


Students


see or hear


advertisements,


for example,


and will


be able


to learn


that


someone


, somewhere,


somehow,


writes


them.


Such


realistic writing


is valuable


in English


classes


because


it helps


students


under-


stand


that writing


is not simply


a classroom


exercise


but is


something


they may


do when


they


are no longer


in school.


b










the activity


is given


at the beginning


a class


period


teacher

other a


free


to take


administrative


roll,


tasks


more


distribute


papers


efficiently


and perform


because


the pupils


are already writing


at their


desks.


The possibility


exists


that


students will make


an increased


effort


to get


to class


on time


order


to participate


learn to have

learn as soon


paper an

as class


in the writing


activities.


id writing material


starts.


ready


In addition


Students


and will


these short


will


begin


writing


activities


can be instrumental


in setting


the mood


of the cl


ass.


Because


they


are specifically


designed


to be fun


students


will


generally


tend


to have


a more


positive


attitude


before


class


actually


begins.


If the assignment


is given .in


the middle


period,


teac


hers


can gather


their


thoughts


and materials


for the second


half


while


students


are practi


cing writing.


Sometimes


a class


ends


a few minutes


earlier


than


expected


there


not really


sufficient


time


to begin a


new topic


lesson.


During


these


times,


teachers


could


give


a short


writing


activity


rather


than


allow instructional


time


to be


wasted.


These


short


writing


activities


sound


like


a panacea


English


educators.


only


are they


fun and


practical,


consider

and- less


the benefit

apprehensive


if they

writers


are successful i

. Short writing


n promoting

activities


better


have


potential


to give


highly


apprehensive


students


renewed


confidence


ass










This


confidence


might


help


to make


good


writers


out of previously


mediocre


ones


or might


help


to make


acceptable writers


previously


illiterate


ones.


Statement


of the Problem


Two major


concerns


of English


educators


were


addressed:


writing


apprehension and


writing


achievement.


Writing


achievement


scores


in the last


decade


have


been


poor


(Olson,


1986).


Teachers


are expected


to improve


the quality


of writing;


yet,


most


teachers


are unaware of


research


in this


area


continue


to believe


in the ineffective


method


grammar


instruction


to make


the difference


(Western,


1978).


teaching


grammar,


teachers


might


be cultivating


a strong


negative


attitude


toward


English


in their


students


(Elley,


Barham,


Lamb,


Wyllie,


1976).


Writing


apprehension,


a manifestation


a negative attitude


toward


writing,


researchers


have


interferes

suggested


with writing


a small


achievement.


Several


but significant


consistently negative


correlation


between writing


apprehension


and writing


achievement


(Book,


1976;


Bova,


1979;


Daly


, 1977,


1978


Daly


Miller,


1975b,


1975c;


Faigley,


Witte,


Daly,


1981;


Reed


, Vandett,


Burton,


1983).


A highly


apprehensive


individual


one who


is unusually


fearful


and hesitant


about writing


avoids


writing whenever


possible


(Daly


Miller


, 1975a).


Students.


oarticularlv


hiehlv


aD rehensive


ones


must


find


w J -


,










easily


enable


teachers,


especially


those


unknowledgeable


about


research,


to implement


the idea


into


their


plans


and the time


involved


for evaluation


is manageable.


Statement


of Purpose


The purpose of


this


research


was to inve


stigate


the effects


daily


short


writing


activities


on students


level


of writing


apprehension


and writing


achievement


with


special


emphasis


students


are initially


classifi


as high


apprehensive.


following


specific


questions


were


posed


in this study:


Will


the frequent


use of


short


writing


activities


with


no feedback


or (b)


positive


eedback


used


conjunction


with


one instructional


comment


affect


students


level


of writing


apprehension?


Will


the frequent


use of short


writing


activities


with


no feedback


or (b)


positive


eedback


used


conjunction

students" 1

students wh


with


evel


one instructional


of writing


are initially


comment


apprehension of


classified


affect

those


as high


apprehensives


Will


the frequent


use of short


writing


activities


with


no feedback


or (b)


positive


feedback


used


conjunction


with


one instructional


comment


affect


students '


levels


of writing


achievement?


will


the freonent


use or


short


writinfe


activities


with










students'

students


levels


of writing


are initially


achievement

classified a


of those


.s high


apprehensive?


Statement


of Hypotheses


In order


to fulfill


purposes


of the study--to


investigate


level


English


control


the effects


of writing


teachers


group


of short


apprehension


participated


, an experimental


writing


and writing


in the study.


group


activities

.e achieveme


Each


(Exl)


on students

'nt--three


teacher


an experimental


group


(Ex2)


for nine


intact


groups.


Exi indicated


short


writing


activity


with no


eedback,


and Ex2 indicated


short


writing


activities


with


feedback.


High


apprehensive


individuals


based

served


on operational

as selective


definitions


samples


in each of


for additional


the nine

analyses.


groups

The


following


research


hypotheses


were


tested


separately


at the


sixth


seventh


, and eighth grades:


After


adj using


pretes


t diff


erences,


there will


be no


significant


differences


.05)


among


posttest


writing


apprehension scores


the control


, Exi,


and Ex2


students.


After


adjusting


pretest


differences


there


will


significant


differences


.05)


among


posttest


writing


apprehension scores


of the initially


high


annnrihenn i ua


Tnntrnl


anti E r2 Rlnt iants.










After


adj using


pretest


differences


there


will


significant


differences


.05)


among


the posttest


writing


achievement


scores


of the control,


and Ex2


students.


After


adj using


pretest


differences,


there


will


significant


differences


.05)


among


posttest


writing


achievement


scores


of the initially


high


apprehensive


control,


Exl,


and Ex2 students.


Need


for the Study


Recognition of


nationally


declining


achievement


in writing


ability


interest


has caused


in improving


legislators


writing


and educators


skills.


to have


government


a concerted


from


national


to state


levels,


has recognized


the problem and


invested


enormous


amounts


money


into


combating


deficient


skills


in writing.


The Bay


Area


Writing


Project


(Bay


Area,


1979)


began in


1971


as a result


of the


poor


quality


of writing


students


at the University


of California,


Berkeley.


California


English


writing


teachers were


quality.


not alone


the fall


in their


of 1977,


efforts


this


to improve


regional


poor


attempt


meet


a local


need evolved


into


the National


Writing


Project.


Excellence


in writing


a valued


activity:


The Bay


Area


Writing


Project


and the National


Writing


Project


operated


on an annual


budget


excess


of $650,000.00


(Stahlecker,


1979).


Millions


of dollars


have


been


invested


in the establishment


P










communication,


April


1986).


The Jack


Gordon


Writing


Skills


Act of 1982


was established


to improve


the writing


competency


Florida


s secondary


school


students


(Barnes,


1986).


These


programs


are designed


and to provide


to reduce


high school


English


the enrollment


teachers


in English


with more


classes


time


evaluate


papers.


English


teachers


involved


in the


program may


teach


no more


than


100 students


during


the day


and must


have


students


complete


a graded


writing


activity


at least


once


a week.


Efforts


are currently


being made


to extend


this


program into


middle


school


years.


Despite


the interest,


time,


money


invested


in this


skill,


response


Report (

Progress


writing


proficiency


to recent


Boyer, 1

(NAEP),


still


educational


983)


not improved.


reports,


and the National


are calling


for renewed


such


Educators


as the Carnegie


sessment

emphasis


of Educational

on writing.


According


to the findings


the NAEP,


"the majority


of American


students


cannot


write


prose


that


successfully


informs,


persuades,


or entertains


and are writing


no better


than


their


peers did


decade


ago"


(Olson,


1986,


p. 6).


Thomson,


the executive


director


of the NAEP

in writing


, stated

(cited i


that


n Olson,


students


1986).


not get

Even when


sufficient

writing e


practice


experiences


are provided,


many


students


will


not do them.


The students


not practicing


their


writing


skills


are often


ones


need


most


help.


Highly


apprehensive


individ-


. --





I I










they


do write,


highly


apprehensive


students


are not likely


to be


receptive


to instruction


(Smith,


1984).


Several


researchers


have


suggested


that


prior


negative


experiences


with writing


are generally


source


of the


development


negative


attitudes


toward


writing


(Daly


1979


Harris


, 1978


Rose


, 1980).


Students


who have


never


experienced


success


with writing


are often discouraged


the initial


frustrations


and discomforts


that


are generally


felt


at the


onset


of a writing

students" ne


assignment


gative


and,


attitudes


hence, abandon

interfere with


the task.


their


These


development


writers


because


they


neither


sufficient


practice with writing


nor do they


find


act itself


rewarding.


Productive


effective writers,


on the other


hand,


are able


to put


these


initial


negative


feelings


into


proper


perspective


because,


having


experienced


success


, they


have


developed


enough


confidence


positive


attitudes


toward


act of


writing.


Delimitations


Random sampling


the preferred


method


doing


experimental

nonequivalent


research;


however,


control-group


a quasi-experimental


pretest-posttest


design,


design,


was chosen


for this


study


to the necessity


of using


intact


s school


classes.


Three


teachers


from Fort


Clarke


Middle


School,


Gainesville,


Florida.


volunteered


to participate


- -


the study.


These










daily.


Each


teacher


had a control


group,


and Ex2 for


total


of nine


intact


groups


three


for each middle


school


grade


level.

writing


Although


the three


apprehension


groups were


and writing


nonequivalent


achievement


levels,


terms


every


attempt was made


to have


the control


and experimental


groups


similar


as possible.


Treatments


were


randomly


assigned


to two of


groups


Exi indicated


short writing


activities


with


feedback,


feedback.


writing

using s


and Ex2 indicated


Pretest


achievement


specific data


short


posttest


were


writing


data


collected


collection


activities


on writing


the principal


procedures


see


with


apprehension and


investigator


Appendices


D & E).


same


procedures


were


followed


each


teacher


at each


grade


level


thus,


the researcher


controlled


for teacher


and grade


level


differences.


sum,


the selection


of the subject


population


limited


students


Fort


enrolled


Clarke Middle


in the sixth,


School


seventh,


appear


and eighth grades


to restrict


generalizability


of the study.


However,


Fort


Clarke Middle


School


balanced

addition,


students


were


sample of

because


not an exclusive


middle

three d


school


different


group


children

teachers


and represented


in the community.


volunteered


participation


in the study


and each


teacher


taught


at a different


grade


level,


this


study


representation from each


of the


middle


school grades.


It is safe


to conclude


that


the findings






11




Limitations


In this


teacher


study


effects,


limiting


mortality,


factors

pretest


were


history


effects


and maturation,


scorer


rater


differences,


and the limited


duration


of the study.


study was


limited


to students


in preestablished


groups


of those


teachers


taught


three


periods


of the


same


English


class


daily


and who were


willing


to volunteer


as participants


this


study.


Each


teacher


was assigned


a control


group,


an Exi,


and an Ex2


in an effort


to control


for teacher


differences.


History


and maturation


were


additional


threats


to internal


validity


because


one cannot


be certain


that


groups


were


exposed


to the


same


events


and that


they


had the


same


maturational


processes.


Enthusiasm for


presentation of


the short


writing


activities


could


not be controlled;


some


teachers


characteristically


display


a more


positive


attitude


about


them


than


others .


Also,


it is


well


known


that


some


teachers


are better


teachers


than


others


this


could


not be controlled.


Finally,


teachers


were


instructed


that


the short writing


activities


were


not to interfere


with


their


regular


lesson


plan


for each


day.


It is assumed


that


regular writing


instruction


occurred


in each


of the teacher's


classes,


the only


difference


being


that


the experimental groups


had the addition of


daily


short writing


activities.


-a-_--- 1 s


I ^ A-- -t -a A .. ...


I


A


_---- --


A A


1


___


I- ..1 -- A- 1- -


I











from students


who completed


at least


two-thirds


of the daily


short


writing


activities


were


used.


There


have


been


a pretest


effect


on the Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension


Measure


since


all students


completed


that


instrument


at the beginning


and ending


a specified


period.


Students did


not know,


however


that


this


instrument


measured


their


writing


apprehension.


The researcher


explained


prior


treatment


that


this


instrument was


used


measure


writing


enj oyment.


Since


the control


and experimental


groups


each


underwent


same


procedure,


pretest


effect should


have


been


negligible.


same


holds


true


for the possibility


of the


Hawthorne effect


, the subjects"


knowledge


that


they


participating


in an


experiment,


being


a factor


threatening


ecological


validity.


posttest


writing


sample


was controlled


across


conditions


for time,


composition


topic,


and procedure


was obtained


for administration.


from each


student


Only


one


at the beginning


ending


of the study.


A slightly


modified


version


of the Paul


Diederich


Essay


Rating


Scale


was used


to determine


change


writing


ability


from


these


limited


samples.


Each


paper was


rated


three


professional


holistic


scorers


tests


of interrater


reliability were


performed.


Because


of the large number


compositions,


scoring


took


place


on two different


days.


r A


are


J- _, _


rf


.










In order


to control


for the differences


in providing


feedback for


English


papers


teacher,


of Ex2


wrote


, a parent


volunteer


the instructional


comment


was a veteran


and positive


statement


for each


paper


regardless


of grade


level.


Another


parent


placed


checkmarks


on the top of


papers


from


Exi,


and both


parents


were


asked


to keep


a record


of those


students


wrote


writing


activity


every


day.


Data for


students


in either


experimental


group


failed


to do


at least


20 of


the short


writing


activities


were


not used.


The final


limiting


factor


was the length


of time


allocated


for the study.


A grading


period,


as determined


the policies


of the school


which


was used


in this


study


consists


of six weeks


of instruction.


Six weeks


comprised


the time


involved


for the


completion of


the study.


Definitions


of Terms


A short


writing


activity


a writing


assignment


Appendix A for


a complete


list)


that


requires


three


to five


minutes


to complete.


writing


task does


not call


for formal


academic


strain


prose,


on teacher


requires


little


paperloads)


no evaluation


is designed


solely


further


to enhance


creativity


and enjoyment


poses


no threat


to the student.


Writing


apprehension


refers


to the general


anxiety


that


certain


individuals


might


experience


about


writing


as determined


the Dalv-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure


i see


Appendix


see


a 7


, ,










High


apprehensive


individuals


are those


score


more


than.


one standard


deviation


below the


group


mean


on the Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure.


High


apprehensive


individuals


find


writing


to be unrewarding


and/or


punishing


and will


avoid


writing


whenever r


possible.


Moderate


apprehensive


individuals


are those


score


within


one standard


deviation of


group mean


on the Daly-Miller


Writing

have en


Apprehension Measure.


ough apprehension


Moderate


apprehensive


to be conscientious


individuals


in their work


not have


so much apprehension


that


causes


negative


effects.


apprehensive


individuals


are those


score more


than


one standard


Writing

confident


deviation


above


Apprehension Measure.

,t of their writing ab


Instructional


comments


group mean


ilitie


apprehensive

s and often


are responses


on the Daly-Miller


individuals


are


enjoy writing.


to ideas


in writing


are made


with


the intention


of providing


help


to the author.


Writing


achievement


refers


a student"


competence


writing


as measured


Holistic


scoring


the holistic


is a guided


scoring


procedure


of compositions.


rating written


pieces.


The scoring


occurs


quickly


impressionistically,


trained


raters.


A holistic


scoring guide


which


describes


certain


desirable


characteristics


and low quality


canlA -


levels


of writing


for each


n all crahtlv mnAe 1f 1


and identifies


feature


vPrsi nn


high,


is usually used.


of the Paul


Di edrich


middle,

In this

Essay










ideas,


organization,


wording


and flavor;


and (b)


mechanics


which


includes


usage,


sentence


structure,


punctuation,


capitalization,


abbreviations,


numbers,


spelling,


handwriting,


neatness.


Control


group


refers


to those


students


were


asked


write


a composition on


one of four


topics


and to complete


Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure


at the beginning


ending


a six-week


period.


Experimental


group


(Exl)


completed


same


tasks


as the


control


group,


except


that


these


students


completed


a short


writing


activity


every


for a six-week


period


and received


feedback.


Experimental


group


(Ex2)


completed


same


tasks


as Exi,


except


that


these


students


received


daily


feedback


in the form of


an appropriate


positive


statement


one instructional


comment


regardless


of the number


errors.


Summary


A review


of the related


research indicates


that writing


apprehension is


a factor


that


all teachers


of composition must


address.


While


most


studies


in the field


consist


of college


subjects,


this


study


dealt


with


younger


subjects.


The problems


found


in older


samples were


also


present


in younger


samples.


Students,


regardless


ability


level,


share


some


similar


characters tics


regarding


act of writing.


Highly


aDorehensive


individuals


write


less


skillfully


than


their










A positive


attitude


about


writing


a desirable


charac-


teristic;

negative


therefore,

attitude--mu


a reduction

.st occur be


of writing


fore extremely


prehension--a

anxious writers


can overcome


their


inhibitions


about


writing


and its subsequent


evaluation.


Individuals


are unusually


apprehensive


about


writing


should,


at the


very


least,


have


the opportunity


to reduce


their


apprehension.


Smith


(1984)


discussed


the problems


addressed


this


study


in the following


terms


Teachers


should


address


themselves


to reducing writing


apprehension. .
entire curriculum


This


should


not to


say,


be directed


though,


toward


that


reducing


apprehension.


a writer
product.


First,


is to take


Second,


some


care


apprehension


that


not all students


produces
suffer


necessary ni
an acceptable
from apprehen-


sion.


Activities


the problem,


then,


that


are designed


should


also


benefit


to reduce or


students


prevent
ho lack


writing


anxiety.


In the best


possible world,


activities


that
for


reduce
other r


apprehension


seasons,


would


allowing


be pedagogically


teachers


sound


to reduce anxiety


and develop


skills


at the


same


time.


Concerned


teachers


would


likely


adopt


strategies


that


shown


to reduce


writing


anxiety,


but few researchers


have


investigated


specific methods


for reducing writing


apprehension.


Some


apprehension is


necessary


in order


for students


to be


conscientious


in their work,


even


though


it has been shown


that


too much


anxiety


has negative


effects.


Studies


are needed


that


focus


on reducing


high apprehension


levels while


increasing


writing


proficiency.


short


writing


activities


used


in this


study were


intended


to curb writing


apprehension


were


also


are










The four


research


questions


posed


study


important


for the following


reasons


If the inclusion


daily


short writing


activities


in a teacher'


regular plan


decreases


writing


are identified


apprehension

as highly a


particularly


pprehensive,


for those


then


students


students will,


perhaps,


become


confident


writers


are more


willing


practice writing;


and (b)


if daily


short writing


activities


increase


writing


achievement,


then


it would


certainly


be time


well


spent


and would


be easily


implemented


in classroom


situations


teachers,


particularly


those


who lack


know


edge


about


to teach writing


are
















CHAPTER


REVIEW


OF RELATED


LITERATURE


purpose


daily


short writing


apprehension


of this


study was


activities


and writing


to investigate


on students"


achievement


with


levels


special


the effects

of writing


emphasis


students who


are initially


classified


as high apprehensives.


review shows


that


there


a need


for educators


to remain


con-


cerned


over


students"


lack


of writing


proficiency,


writing


apprehension is


negatively


correlated


to writing


there


are many problems


associated


with improving writing


skills.


Need


for the Improvement


of Writing


Although


there


is currently widespread


attention


being


placed


on students'


lack


of writing


proficiency,


the situation


new.


To seek a


better way


to teach writing


to students


all levels


a number


has been


years.


one of


until


concerns


the 1960s


of English


national


educators


attention


students'


with


lack of


the English


proficiency

teaching pro


in writing


fession.


become


Steps wer


a crucial

e finally


issue

taken


by professional


associations


and by


the federal


government


improve


the situation


(Shugrue,


1968


, p. xiv).


Conant


(1959)


recommended


that


"the


time


devoted


to English


achievement,


not










English


(NCTE)


in its


report


on the


status


of English


teaching


identified


seven


important


goals


to be implemented


on a national


level


if the teaching


of English


was to be improved;


the need


focus


instruction


on language,


literature,


and composition


was at


of the list


Ten years


later


, the problem still


not been resolved.


The Bay


Area


Writing


Project


began


1971

being


as a result

produced a


of the concern about


t the University


poor


of California at


quality


of writing


Berkeley


(Bay


Area,


1979).


the fall


of 1979,


16 sites


in California


and 52


additional


sites


across


the nation


joined


together


to form


National


Writing


Project


(Bay


Area,


1979,


nation


involved


in addressing


the need


for its people


to be able


communicate


effectively.


The National


Assessment


of Educational


Progress


(NAEP)


began


collecting


data


in 1969


from


representative


samples


of primary,


middle,


secondary


, and post-secondary


students


in order


to report


student


per f ormance


in reading,


writing,


and other


academic


subjects


(Johnson,


1975).


NAEP


does


not impose


a national


standard


of competency.


The general


plan


is to repeat


assessment


of each


learning


area


every


four


or five


years


on a


national


scale


in order


to determine


the current


status


student


abilities


measure


changes


from


prior


assessments.


Unfortunately,


there


not been much improvement


in the last


decade


(Olson.


1986).


was










the general


level


of writing


skills


was


not very


high


(Johnson,


1975)


The 9-year-olds


had limited


skill


in sentence


construc-


tion,


limited


vocabularies


, and displayed


an inability


understand


the conventions


of writing.


The 13-year-olds


were


either


unable


to understand


the conventions


of writing


or were


unable


to develop


an idea.


About


half


of the 17-year-olds


some


command


of the basics


but did


not go much


beyond


this


level.


They wrote


using


simple


sentences,


common


words,


and simple


ideas


(Johnson,


1975,


pp. 57-59).


According


to findings


of the


1984


assessment


cannot write


of the NAEP,


prose


that


"the


successful


majority o

ly informs


f American students


, persuades,


entertains,


are writing


no better


than


their


peers


decade ago"


(Olson,


1986,


. Mr


Lapointe,


an employee


the Educational


Testing


Service


(ETS)


which


administers


national


assessments,


noted


that


the study


revealed


a relation-


ship


between


student


performance


and teacher


behavior:


About
papers


75% of students
for spelling a


their


grammar.


teachers
. [It


correct


their


is interesting


to note
grammar.
however,


that]


Fewer
say their


youngsters


than one


perform well
out of three


teachers discuss


'th


in spelling
students,
e quality o


their


ideas'


with


them and


ask them


to rewrite


passages


to make t
one-third


he writing


clearer.


of the students


As a result


do well


in that


'less
area."


than


(cited


in Rodman,


1986,


The majority


of the 9-


and 17-year-olds


could


not write


"adequate"


piece


of informative


prose


an "adequate"


imaginative


description.


nor


an adequatee"


persuasive


letter


(Olson.


1986.










Scott


D. Thomson,


the executive


director


of the National


Association


of Secondary


School


Principals,


stated


that


there


two main


reasons


students


not get


sufficient


practice


writing.


First


there


are too


many


students


for English


teachers


to handle


paper


load


and second,


most


English


teachers


literature


majors


and lack sufficient


preparation for


teaching


composition


(cited


in 01son,


1986,


p. 39).


Problems


Related


to Improving


Students


Writing


Skills


The Paper


Load


reasons


were


suggested


Thomson of


the National


Assessment


of Educational


Progress


(NAEP)


as to why


students


not get


sufficient


practice


time


in writing:


there


are too


many


papers


for teachers


to handle


the paperload


adequately,


English


teachers


are not current


about


research


in writing


(cited


in Olson,


1986).


According


a study


the National


Council


Teachers


of English


(cited


in Barnes,


1986),


English


teachers


spend


an average of


8.6 minutes


paper


evaluating writing


assignments


which


average


250 words.


an English


teacher who


teaches


five


classes


of 30 students


this would average


21.5


hours


week


just


to evaluate


one 250 word


composition.


The conclu-


sions

size


are obvious:

of the writing


Either


English


assignment


teachers


and/or


modify


need t

their


o reduce


evaluation


procedures,


or each


state


needs


to reduce


the number


students


In Enrl i h r


1 asfsQ.


are


are










paperload


problem.


On July


1981


six million


dollars


were


provided for

for students


the establishment


in grades


a writing


and 12 in the


enhancement


state


program


of Florida


(Barnes,


1986).


This


writing


skills


program,


the Jack


Gordon


Writin

state

teachi

state


g


Skills


to implement

ng loads for

funding, sch


Act of 1982,


a state-wide


writing


ool


represents


the first


program to


teachers.


districts


reduce


In order


had to make


attempt


classroom


to qualify for


the following


changes


Reduce


the language


arts


class


sizes


no more


than


students


per class,


reduce


the daily


student


loads


of teachers


such


classes


no more


than


100 students


per day,


and require


students


in these


classes


to produce


one written


product


each


week


that


class


is in session.


It is little


surprise


that


reactions


to the program have


been


positive,


particularly


English


teachers.


state


contributed


increasing


amounts


of monies


to the program each


year.


Over


30 million dollars


been appropriated for


the continuation


of the program for


this


year,


but no research


been conducted


to evaluate


effectiveness


(F.A.


Carpenter


personal


communication,


April


1986).


a report


prepared


Barnes


(1986),


several


limitations


of the


program are


listed


Additional
strategies


teaching


are


activities


required


and alternative


to do a better


teaching


job working with


ntn tha(lr ni gb rlna


de-ltl o.


Q ^~ai/iot-










program


provides


no funds


for inservice


education


of such


teachers.


Writing


essentially


a recursive


process,


rather


than


a set of sequentially


learned


skills


In order


students


to develop


into


'good


writers


- before


the end


of high
before


a process


school,


intensive


the 10th grade,


rather


than


instruction


and writing


as a set


should


should


of isolated


begin long


be taught
skills.


To date,


funding


for the program has


been limited


grades


10-12.


It is interesting


to note


that


Barnes'


second


limitation,


"many


English

writing,


teachers


lack knowledge


is in accord


with


about


Thomson's


recent

(NAEP)


research in

observation about


teachers.


The NAEP


acknowledged


that


there


has been a


lot of


emphasis


on improving writing


instruction


at the state and


local


levels,


it is still


far from


enough.


Mr. Lapointe


commented:


don't


think


anyone


has the


answers


on how to


teach


writing


effectively.


If this


can


start


the debate,


if this


can


fuel


that,


then


think


we've served


a purpose"


(cited


in Olson,


1986


p. 39).


Teachers '


Belief


in Grammar


as Writing


Instruction


Many


English


teachers


have


literature


backgrounds,


have


insufficient


knowledge


regarding


the composing


process,


and do


not keep


abreast


recent


research


in writing.


"That


understanding


* writing


beliefs


grammar


has been


in the history


is related


one


to the development


of the most


of education,


consistently


originating


of skill


held


in the philo-










cases


negative,


in improving


the writing


performance of


students


(Braddock,


1969;


Elley


, Barham,


Lamb,


Wyllie


1976;


Harris


1962;


Sherwin,


1969).


Despite


the absence


of research


to support


grammar

continue


instruction,

to believe


many

that


teachers


and the general


it is essential


public


for students


to learn


grammar


if they


are ever


going


to write


well


(Western,


1978).


Smith


(1948)


Maize


(1952),


Robins on


(1960)


and Harris


(1962),


although using


different


tests


of the grammar-composition


issue,


all concluded


that


"the


study


of formal


grammar


contrib-


utes


little


to students


skill


in writing"


(Sherwin,


1969,


134).


The Harris


(1962)


and Elley


et al. (1976)


studies


"representative


tional


of the best


research


of the effects


kind


* and should


grammar


study"


of thoroughly


be included


(Petrosky,


designed


in every


1977,


educa-


discussion


p. 86).


Harris


study


(1962)


focused


on the effects


of traditional


grammar


instruction


no grammar


instruction.


The Elley,


Barham,


Lamb,


and Wyllie


study


(1976)


focused


on the effects


of traditional


grammar


instruction,


transformational


grammar


instruction,


instruction


several


that


different


emphasized r

definitions


leading


and writing.


available


for what


There are

constitutes


"grammar"


reading


instruction and


and writing.


what


constitutes


The following


an "emphasis


are the definitions


used


the Harris


and/or


Elley


studies


(Petrosky


, 1977)


Trn ltiann1l


Carnmna r


inntrtt i nn onprnal 1v


inrl,,dsn


are


.










Transformational


grammar


instruction


emphasizes


analysis of
grammatical


sentences


in order


to discover


and apply


rules.


The reading


and writing


students


spent


about


40% of


their
class


time
sets


and 20% of


on free


[of b
their


reading


ooks


time


with


of books,


a few


formal


in creative writing.


on reading
assignments,


(pp.


86-87)


Harris


(cited


in Petrosky,


1977)


compared


essays


written


high school


students


studied


traditional


grammar with


students


analyzed


received


using


no grammar


objective


instruction.


criteria for


essays


number


were


errors


sentence


complexity.


After


years,


the results


showed


that


the students


studied


traditional


grammar


performed


significantly worse


in their


essays


than


those


students


who had


not studied


grammar.


non-grammar


students


fewer


errors


in their writing


and also


exhibited


more


sentence


complexity


than


their


counterparts


student s


studied


received


grammar


f ormal


did master


grammar


instruction.


terminology


and the


application


of grammatical


analysis


to sentences,


but "these


abilities


do not


effect


the students"


actual


writing"


87).


Elley


et al. (1976)


studied


students


growth in


reading


comprehension,


sentence


structure,


essay writing


skills,


spelling,


vocabulary,


literature,


and attitudes


over


a three-year


period.


No significant


differences


were


noted


on any


of the


variables


after


the first


year,


except


that


"the


TG [


trans-


formational


grammar]


students


liked


writing


less


than


the other










13).


third


year


analysis


showed


that


both


traditional


and transformational


grammar


groups


scored


better


when


correcting


errors


in short


sentences


on the English


Usage


Test


than


those


students


in the reading


and writing


groups,


their


advantage was minimal


mechanical


faults,


and limited


not to sensitivity


to "rather

y to senten


trivial

ce structure"


15).


a Semantic


It is interesting


Differential


Scale,


to note


that,


both grammar


* terms

groups


of attitude

expressed


strong


negative


attitudes


toward


their


English


classes


while


reading


and writing


group


responded


positively


toward


their


English


classes.


conclusion of


this


study was


"that


English


grammar,


whether


traditional


or transformational,


has virtually


no influence


on the language


growth


of typical


secondary


students"


18).


It is evident


from


the review of


the literature


"that


teaching grammar


, old-fashioned


or new-fangled,


has no effect


the [writing]


skills


(Moffett,


1983,


statement


made


Braddock in


1969


still


holds


true


today:


"Almost


researcher


has discovered


any more


correlation


between knowledge


of traditional


grammar


and quality


of composition


than


can be


found,


for example,


between


grammar


and geography"


447).


stud y


grammar


while


there


is no empirical


evidence


to justify


its teaching,


is still


taught


in the belief


that


it helps


students


with


their writing.


The teaching


- L


grammar


continues


__










sentences


whose


forms


they


cannot


describe"


(Western,


1978,


287).


Petrosky


(1977)


voiced


concern over


the time


devoted


grammar

reading


instruction

and writing"


because

which


"this

is time


means

that


time


could


taken away


otherwise


from


spent


on actual


composition


practice


88).


Frequency


in Writing


App lebee


(1981),


in a


report


of writing


in secondary


schools


made


the recommendation


that


teachers


should


increase


the frequency


of writing


students.


The basic


assumption


that


one learns


writing.


Learni


to write

ng about


by writing,

something a


not by


learning


Lnd learning


about

to do


something


are very


different.


Western


(1978)


made


this


poignant


distinction


between grammatical


knowledge


(knowing


that)


and the


skillful


use of language


(knowing


how)


To people who


how and


knowing


accept


that,


the distinction


it is


, again,


between knowing
not at all


astonishing


to be
What
would


that


a good


is astonishing
be. Similar


the learning


learning


teaching
to teach


is that


assumptions


skills.


of other


that


the relevant


about


grammar


students


anybody


not proved


to write


should


are not
Nobody


laws


often
learns


of statics


well.


think


made


about


how to
and


dynamics


are such


and such.


thing


to do is


on the slopes


and practice


doing what


good


skiers


Guided


practice


generally


more


effective


than


unguided,


extent


and the guidance
the instructor's


will


be informed


knowing- that


some


knowledge.


even


the instructor


needs


a physicist'


knowledge,


we quickly would mark


him a fraud


if he insisted


that
ready


his students


to ski.


become


physicists


in order


to get


287)


Children are


continuously


learning


about


lannua e


I n rL a


ara










where


one would


think--and


right


so--they would


belong.


Over


over


again,


noted


educators


tell


us that


writing


cannot


taught


theoretically,


in the abstract.


Writing must


experienced


in order


to be learned


in order


to learn


how to


write,


one must write.


The student


needs


to write


every


day.


Murray


(1982)


exposes,


nulla dies


sine


linea,


never


a day


without


a line"


which


has been


the motto


of several


respected


writers


30).


Atwater


(1981),


a professional


writer,


recalls


"Daily


Themes


was


most


valuable


course


he took


in college:


Every


day,


five


on something,


days


a week,


and it could


we had


be nearly


to turn out
anything.


a page


point


was we wrote


* and it [the


daily writing


a lot to help


us learn


to write.


Another

minute


thoughts


benefit

exercises


quickly


to writing

. is that


regularly,

it aids in


and succinctly


particularly


learning "to


on paper;"


short 1

organize


an activity


that


required


throughout


life


(Atwater,


1981,


A number


of studies,


at the secondary


and college


level,


have


focused


on the frequence


of writing


assignments.


Maize


(1953)


reported


research


findings


which


support


the hypothesis


that


"the


only way


to learn


to write


is to write.


In his study,


he divided


the lower


quarter


of freshman


students


those


who had


an average


IQ of


99 and a


10th


grade


reading


level,


into a


control


and an experimental


group.


Students


in the control


group










14 weeks


for a total


of 14 themes;


whereas,


students


in the


experimental

Maize (


group


1953)


wrote

offered


a theme

this c


a day


onclusi


for a total

on, "the ex


of 42 themes.


perimental


class


showed


overwhelming


evidence


of superiority


over


control


group


in language


used


the end of the semester"


335).


He based


that


conclusion


on the comparison


of the


equivalent


forms


A and


Test


III of the Rinsland-Beck Natural


Test


of English


Usage


which


was administered


before


and after


instruction.


Based


on the limitations


of the


test


used


and the


fact


that


its emphasis


on usage


not on ability


communicate


a message


effectively,


one can hardly


conclude


that


by writing more

superiority" in


one will


writing


show

ability


"overwhelming

y. Using an


evidence


objective means


evaluating


a subjective


task


poses


a problem for


all researchers.


Christensen


(1965)


designed


a study


to test


the belief


that


act of writing


teaches


one to write.


group


of students


read


prose


selections


from


a college


freshman


reader


wrote


themes,


while


the other


group


students


not read


prose


selections


but wrote


themes .


After


comparing


the results


pre-


and postthemes


Christensen found


that


both


groups


made


statistically


significant


improvement


in writing;


however,


"both


groups


improved


approximately


to the


same


extent,


small


differences


between


them were


not statistically


significant"


(cited


in Sherwin.


1969.


0. 165).


In this


study.


having


one


L










Hunting


(1967)


rev iewed


five


studies


related


to writing


frequency


and concluded


that


frequency


in writing


does


necessarily


improve writing


ability.


Before


a reasonably valid


conclusion


can be drawn


about


the efficacy


of writing


practice


students' proficiency

on how much practice


in writing,

is needed, w


more


that


research


kind


needs


of practice


to be done

is best,


what


kind


of evaluation


techniques


should


be used,


what


effect


does


frequency


have


on writing


attitude,


and what


constitutes


improvement


in writing.


In arriving


answers


to these


questions


it is hoped


that


teachers


will


not lose


sight


of the


deeper


reasons


one writes--to express,


to create meaning,


communicate.


Smith


(1983)


reminded


composition


teachers


that


writing


not for exposing ignorance


and destroying


sensitivity


in order


assess


ability,


but,


rather


purpose


of writing


is for


discovery.


He provided


this


"short


and incomplete


list


writing


purposes:


Writing is
published,


songs


to be


be mailed,


to be


sent,


for stories


poems
sung,
jokes


cartons


to be read,


to be recited


newspapers
to be told,


books


to be


ays to be acted,


to be shared,


notes


to be labelled,


letters


to be passed,
instructions


cards
to be


followed,


designs


to be made,


recipes


to be cooked,


messages to be exchanged,
excursions to be planned,


programs
catalogs


to be organized,
to be compared,


entertainment
circulated, a


collected,
and diaries


guides


to be consulted,


mnouncements


posters


m


to be posted,


to be displayed,


to be concealed.


lemos
bill


cribs


to be
s to be


to be hidden,


566)


not










it with


real


audiences,


said


Parker


(1979)


"not


studying


applying


abstract


rhetorical


principles


in exercises


which


teacher


alone will


read


and judge"


How often


writes,


in effect


how well


one writes,


will


be determined


motivated


and confident


a student


say something.


Writing


The Development


Apprehension


of the Construct


term


"writing


apprehension"


was coined


Daly


Miller


(1975a)


to describe


an individual


s tendency


to respond


favorably


or unfavorably


toward


writing


situations


in order


provide empirical


evidence


on an


attitude


that


affects


writing


behavior.


The impetus


for their


research


was based


on studies


done


on communication


apprehension which


a pervasive


anxiety


trait


that


seriously


affects


a large


proportion


of the popula-


tion"


(Daly


Miller,


1975a,


43). Prior


communication


studies


have


shown


that


high apprehensives


tend


to be less


inclined

occupation


to achieve

ns they pe


(Giffin &


receive


Gilham,


to need


1971)


little


tend


to choose


communication


(Daly


McCroskey,


1975) ,


and tend


to have


lower


self


concepts


(McCroskey


Daly,


1974)


than


others


(cited


in Daly


Miller,


1975a,


243).


Specifically,


hesitant

possible.


some


about writing


people


and avoid


appear


classroom situations


unusually


writing


said


fearful


situations


Dalv


whenever


and Miller


one


- AL


L










required,


and who


seldom


enroll


voluntarily


courses


where


writing

identify

(1975a),


is known t

highly ap

developed


o be demanded"

prehensive ind


an empirically


244).


ividuals


based


In an


, Daly


effort


and Miller


standardized


self-report


instrument


to measure


an individual'


s level


writing


apprehension


on an


interval


scale.


The original measure


consisted


of 63 items


which were


modeled

were co


after


instruct


previous

ed so tha


research

t each i


on communication


tem dealt


apprehension


with some form of


apprehension about


writing.


The items


dealt


with


respondents'


perceptions


regarding


their


anxiety


about


writing


and included


statements


attitudes


about


about


their


beliefs,


evaluations


likes


made


and dislikes,


self,


peers,


and their


teachers,


professionals.


These


items


were


set into


a Likert


scale


format


with


five


possible


choices


from


strongly


agree


to strongly


disagree.


The calculation


of choices


produces


a single


score


which


is used


to determine


an individual"


location


on a


bipolar


affective


dimension.


Response


bias


was controlled


randomizing


the valences of


the items.


All items


with


factor


"loadings


above


.60 were

these 26

Miller,


selected


items

1975a,


compose


accounted

p. 245).


the initial


instrument


for 46% of the total


The obtained


[because]


variance"


reliability


(Daly


of the measure


was


.940


RAnd thsf moan


test-retest


arnrP


reliability


wOA 7Q.9R Tal h n


over


ctannrard


a week was


Aavlmn iSf rm r


.923,


IR.RI










The Predictive


Validity


of the Writing


Apprehension Measure


Following


the development


of the Writing


Apprehension


Measure


, Daly


attempted


to provide


some


evidence for


predictive

effects of


validity


writing


of the instrument

apprehension. In


examining


subsequent


some


studies,


of the

Daly


looked


at the interrelationship


between


writing


apprehension


various


other measures


such


as message


intensity


(Daly


& Miller,


1975b)


advanced


scores


courses,


success


expectation


and sex differences


willingness


(Daly


& Miller,


to take


1975c)


occupational


1977)


writing


choi


(Daly


competency


Shamo


(Daly,


, 1976)


1978)


message


academic


encoding

decisions


(Daly

(Daly


Shamo


, 1978)


teachers


role


expectancies


of the apprehensive


writer


(Daly,


1979)


and self


-esteem and


personality


(Daly


Wilson,


1980)


sum,


Daly


found


that


highly


apprehensive


individual


wrote


less


intense


messages


not expect


succeed


in writing


courses,


chose


occupations


and classes


that


require


little


or no writing,


and perceived


their


past


experiences


with


writing


as negative.


Teachers


have


signifi-


cantly


better


expectancies


for high


apprehensive males


and low


apprehensive


females


teachers


expect


that


males


not enjoy


writing


but females


. The


correlation


between


the Writing


Apprehension Measure,


which


deal


with


attitudinal


variables


, and


the SAT-verbal


test,


which


deal


with aptitude variables,


fln t* -l n nroh r4


hInri


rat rnnflAant


1" -_-


was


I dT T I n T T


Qv^-m^a h^TtO 1 !a


*11










Other


researchers


have


also


studied


writing


apprehension.


Claypool


(1980)


found


a significant


negative


correlation


between


a teacher's

ments made.


level

Highl


of apprehension

y apprehensive


and number

high school


of writing

teachers


assign-


assigned


average


of 7


writing


assignments


per year


compared


to 19.9 made


apprehensive


teachers.


Gere


, Schuessler,


and Abbott


(1984)


found


a positive


relationship


between


a teacher'


apprehension


concern


"that


students


use standard


English"


(cited


in Daly,


1985,


53).


This


finding


intere


sting


when


compared


with


Rose


s (1980)


suggestion


that


"blocked"


writers


have


a problem with rule


rigidity


, Newkirk's


(1979)


observation


that


"perfectionis


m" makes


students


fearful


of writing


Holbrook's


(cited


in Emig,


1983)


comment


that


teachers


overemphasis


on conventions


makes


children


become


non-writers.


It is possible


that


highly


apprehensive


teachers


tend


to transfer


their


feelings


of apprehension


onto


their


students


doing


those


same


kind


of "conventions"


that


made


them apprehensive


in the


first


place.


Unfortunately


, little


causal


research


has been done


on teacher

Writing Ap


behaviors


prehension


and writing apprehension.

as it Relates to Writing Achievement


terms


of writing


and writing


related


skill


, several


studies


have


shown


that


apprehension


is associated


with actual


writing


performance.


Poor


skill


development


was


most


common


t 1n fn 1 a n n nf A C a 4 n an a f a mr- n


dfnCW A I C % n\ f/^


nrr^ rrr nlt rr *^ ^l '^rnt^' nV


nFrf-if vw4 4 ^


V


r r /










apprehensi


ves


write


compositions


with


fewer words,


convey


less


information,


use less


qualification,


use lower


levels


of language


intensity,


and have


less


command


over matters


usage


written


conventions


when


compared


with


apprehensi


ves


(Book,


1976


1981


Daly,


Garcia,


1977


Daly


1977


Reed


Miller,


1975c


, Vandett,


Faigley


Burton,


, Daly,


1983)


When


Witte,


using


qualitative measures,


messages


written


high


apprehensi


rated


significantly


apprehensives


(Book,


lower

1976;


in quality


1977


than t

; Daly


hose written


Miller,


1975c)


None


of these


studies


suggest


causalit


Writing


apprehension


does


not necessarily


cause


poor writing


nor


does


poor writing


necessarily


cause


writing


apprehension.


The relationship


likely


a bidirectional


effect


with


each affecting


the other


Daly (1978)


conducted


research


in order


to detect


the actual


skill


or competency


differences


that


exist


between


high


and low


apprehensive


writers


. Over


3,000


undergraduates


enrolled


in a


basic


composition


course


responded


to both


the Writing


Apprehension


Measure


and a 68-item


, multiple-choice


test


writing


competency


(skill)


The multiple-choice


test


assessed


students


knowl


edge


about


mechanics


grammar


and included


items


to test


the student


s ability


to properly


use punctuation,


capitalization


case


, adj


ectives


and adverbs


, diction,


subordination


and parallelism


as well


as the ability


Frn aa ,rfn l e a, .n a


ves


are


"rrnrtrm is a


W4 BOa^ na ila


A


CFnitf I*-


C*n A T At ^


an~aamnn I










Daly


found,


as he hypothesized,


that


high


apprehensives


not perform as well


on a test


of writing


skills


as low


apprehensive.


In every


case


the direction


means


favored


apprehension


group.


Although


Daly'


hypothesis


confirmed,


he offered


some


important


"cautions"


regarding


study


First
very
most


term


limited


important


competency


sense


throughout


competencies


or "skill"


this


used


report.


and skills


which


in a


Many


contribute


to writing


(e.g.,


the ideas)


are not,


and indeed


probably
testing


could


not,


procedure.


be assessed


present


through


research


an objective


is restricted


to the relatively


clear-cut


"rights


and wrongs"


composition.


Second


, a variety


of other


techniques


used


assess


writing


skills


need


to be related


writing a
knowledge
tests, an
gaining a
intricate


apprehensionn
claims. E


d teacher
thorough


prior


ssay


to positing


tests,


different


firm
standardized


evaluations are all important in
understanding of the potentially


relationships


between


performance


apprehension.


Finally,


the relative


roles


of writing


apprehension and


student'


s actual


carefully probed.


overall


writing


writing
writing
Just


success


aptitude


performance
how important
is not known.


in determining a


need


each
(pp.


to be


13-14)


Faigley


, Daly,


and Witte


(1981)


examined


the effect


apprehension


on writing


competency


and writing


performance


of 110


undergraduates.


Differences were


noted


at .07 or less


in favor


of the low apprehensives


in all but


two


measures


(sentence


patterns


on a


and paragraph


number


patterns


of standardized


subtests)


measures


on their


of writing


performances


competency:


Test


of Standard


Written


English,


the English


Composition


Test,


was










terms


significantly


of writing

shorter na


performance,


rrative-descriptive


high apprehensives


essays


wrote


which were


"less


syntactically


"mature'


or 'fluent'


than


their


apprehensive


counterparts"


(Faigley,


Daly,


Witte,


1981,


19).


There


was no effect


for apprehension


in argumentative


essays.


They


concluded


that


highly


apprehensive


individuals


have


less


command


over


usage


and writing


conventions


and are


unable


develop


ideas


as well


as low


apprehensive


individuals.


Changing


Writing


Apprehension


Some


researchers


have


focused


on the modification


of writing


apprehension with


the assumption


that


a positive


attitude


about


writing


is a desirable


characteristic,


and highly


apprehensive


individuals


should


be helped


to lose


some


of their


anxiety


about


writing.


High apprehensive


avoid


writing


whenever


possible.


Even


students


with some


degree of writing


skills


will


not further


those


skills


unless


they


practice


them.


Treatment


methodologies


for helping


apprehensive writers


generally


takes


two forms


examines


the effect


of educational


programs,


such


as a particular


composition


course,


on writing


apprehension


and the other


"identifies


alleviating


tests


writing


various


therapeutic


apprehehension"


(Daly


strategies


, 1985,


aimed


64).


Fox (1980)

apprehension.


developed


a "treatment"


He investigated


the effects


to reduce


writing


two methods


of writing


4 n 44 n A an yr 4 4 4nn n a, -n c 4 an n rn


one


4 rt *f( ** nn- M


Vd nn jj j^r( vC4"4 n n


T.1 1 41 (II l Jr llJ1 -


r










writing,


language


problem


solving


exercises,


instructor-student


conferences.


The second


method


of instruction


was more


conventional.


Students were


lectured


to about writing,


participated


in discussions


and question-answer


periods


about


writing,


structured


writing


exercises


were


exclusively


evaluated


the instructor.


Both groups


showed


a significant


decrease


in writing


apprehension;


however,


Fox found


that


student-centered


workshop


approach


reduced


apprehension


significantly


more


than


the traditional


instructor-centered


approach


did.


No significant


differences


were


noted


terms


writing


quality


for either


group.


Thompson


(1979)


in a


study


of freshman


writers


found


that


her language


study


approach


not only


decreased


writing


apprehension


but improved


writing


ability


as well.


The language


study


approach


included


discussions


of procrastination,


standard


English and


dialects


, the history


and formation


of language,


the connection


between writing


and thinking.


She ended


her study


encouraging


to dispel


teachers


notions


to teach


that


students


writing


about


an obscure


"invention"


process.


Thompson


suggested


that


if students


discover


their


own


"personal


writing


rhythm"


then


they will


be less


apprehensive


about


writing.


Pfeifer

nprsnnna1 tv


(1981)


nn wri itna


studied


snnvpstv


the effects


nnd wrTrtna


peer


evaluation and


np rf nrifnn


a In frnl1su










identical


apprehension


levels


not necessarily produce


same


quality


of writing.


She attributed


the last


finding


personality


differences.


Reducing writing


anxiety,


Pfeifer


concluded,


does


not necessary


improve


writing


ability.


final


note,


she recommended


that


researchers


focus


on anxiety


control


rather


than


reduction.


Learning-centered


writing


or "formative"


writing


tasks


defined


by Weiss


and Walters


(1980)


answer


two questions:


"how


well

being


am I


learning


learned?"


something,


(pp.


4-5)


or how well


These


can I


researchers


express


conducted


something

a study


to find


out if


an increase


in the number


of traditional


writing


tasks


(control)


or an increase


in the number


of non-traditional


writing


tasks


(experimental)


content


courses


would


also


increase


apprehension.


Learning-centered


tasks


were


assigned


15 classes


5 were


used


for control


classes .


The results


showed


that


the apprehension


levels


in 11 of the 15 experimental


classes


decreased,


but not significantly.


was also


observed


that


writing


classes


apprehension


than


levels


the control


decreased


classes,


more


the experimental


not significantly.


Weiss


and Walters


(1980)


offered


this


conclusion:


students


can


be made


to write


when


they


ordinarily


would


not,


if their


instructors


do not have


to be


burdened by
can do such


terms


more without


evaluating mountains


additional


of improved


dreading


writing


learning,


more


prose,


which


if students


clearly pays


and if they
the field i


can write


open


sRlanifirant


Improvement


in their writing


performance










Although


"little


research


has been


conducted


on specific


methods


of instruction


for reducing


writing


apprehension,


(Smith,


1984,


p. 5)


it is clear


that


teachers


should


seek


to help


those


students


are highly


suffer


apprehensive


from writing


about


writing.


apprehension,


some


Not all


apprehension


is probably necessary


one is going


care


enough


to write


acceptable


paper.


Unfortunately,


apprehension


levels


some


out of hand.


In a


large


study


of professional


adults,


Aldrich


feelings


(1982)


about


found


that


writing.


49 of 89 people


She concluded


that


reported


"the


negative


number


negative


answers


a questionnaire]


seems


to indicate


that


dread


and apprehension


are probably preventing


otherwise


competent


people


from approaching writing


tasks


confidently"


300).


Ideally,


teachers


should


develop


activities


that


decrease


or prevent writing


apprehension and


increase writing


ability


same


time.


Some


Possible


Causes


of Apprehension


Cope


(1978)


suggested


several


possible


causes


for writing


apprehension:

an over-adheren


procrastination,


inability


to perfectionism,


to organize materials,


and impatience at


the editing


and proofreading


stage.


Cope


stated


that


students


should


participate


in freewriting,


daily writing,


relaxation


training,


and positive


self-talk activities.


Teachers


should


spend


time


with


th ir


atwlrl oanra


vn r rtn tln


Xt 00^h fl rn oc sk na-n in n^^ nan n --1


ao T\'vTar ac


n


3n










"treatment"


cannot


begin


until


causes


of writing


anxiety


have


been


identified.


Powers,


Cook,


and Meyer


(1979)


argued


that


compulsory


writing


causes


apprehension


in writing.


In their


study,


subj ects


were


enrolled


in a


basic


English


composition


course


a large


university.

auspices of


Half


of the students


enrolling


into


were


a compensatory


admitted


under


program,


and the other


half


were


admitted


under


regular


admission


procedures.


Students


were


required


to write


five


to six compositions


which


were


given


"typical


detailed


composition


criticism"


(Powers,


Cook,


Meyer,


1979,


p. 229).


compensatory


students


demonstrated


significant


increase


in apprehension;


the other


group


also


showed


an increase


which


was not significant.


Their


findings,


however,


are not consistent with other


findings.


In Fox's (1980)


study,


for example,


experimental


students


were


"forced"


to write,


they


had a significant


decrease


in apprehension.


teachers


"force"


students


to write may


be a factor


worth


considering


(Fox,


1980,


p.48).


Smith


(1984)


noted


that


seems


far more


likely


that


the method


of evaluation,


not compulsory writing


responsible


for the increase


in writing


apprehension"


since


other


studies


with compulsory writing


have


decreased


apprehension


The Effects


Teaching


Correctness:


Student


Attitude


Toward


Writing


was










Sputnik'


s effect


on the United


States


had us emphasize


product,


but the British


said


that


the cognitive


and the


affective were


both important


in the writing


instruction.


Data


obtained


from


the National


Assessment


of Education


Progress


(NAEP)


between


1970-1980


indicate


no decline


in the basic


skills


of writing--spelling,


punctuation,


capitalization,


usage--and


slight


decline


in overall


writing


ability


(Cooper,


1981,


5-6).


Beginning


with


Emig'


classic


study


(1971)


of 12th


graders


the teaching


of writing


began


to shift


from a


product-oriented


a process-oriented


approach.


Emig


observed


the behavior,


including


attitude,


of four


students


while


they


were


in the


or process


of writing;


she examined


how they


wrote


rather


than


what


they wrote.


Emig


found


that


students


refrained


from showing


their


real


feelings


because


of their


fear


of the teacher "


criticism.


Lynn,


one of the students


observed


in Emig's


study,


vividly


recalled


how she


learned


about


the amenities


of writing,


particularly


spelling


and handwriting.


Both


were


learned


remembered


under


painful


circumstances.


She remembered a


composition she


wrote


about


a musical


teddy


bear


while


elementary


school


because


of her teacher


being


"embarrassed"


that


she misspelled "musical"

intendent visited the cla


on the day

.ss (Emig,


that

1983,


the district


pp. 84-85).


super-

Regarding


I n trho ltrh -lr


li an/l-T-' #-rr 1 nrr


4n -. a Fll


rr9mro


T.T-o miniL~ oh^


T7A QT


-2n &










differ


greatly from students


own experiences


with writing.


Although students


actually


complete


the writing


task


, they


often


feel


inwardly


pessimi


stic


and antagonist


about


assignment.


In the mid-1970s


student


attitude


toward


writing


became


more


a concern of


researchers.


Metzger


(1976)


studied a


seventh


grader,


a tenth


grader


, and a coll


student


while


writing.

because


These


students


they viewed


their


viewed writing

teachers simple


as a joy


ess


chore


as proofreaders


editors


students


Classroom experi


to consider


ences


writing


with writing


as a pleasant,


encourage


profitable,


purposeful


activity.


Metzger


concluded


saying


that


teachers


should


provide


students


with


many


opportunities


for pleasurabi


writing


experiences


Hogan


(1980)


suggested


that


teachers


should


make


special


efforts


to capture


student


interest


writing


Providing more


opportunities


for writing


in grades


through


nine may


help


teachers


preserve


students


enj oyment


writing.


Teachers


should


perceive


themselves


as writing


coaches


should


be good


listeners


to what


their


students


have


Shaughnessy


(1977)


studied


writing


problems


of basi


writing


colle


freshmen and


found


that


after


several


starts


fear


error


, they


finally produced


sentences


that


were


"hope-


v pnt ntancrl aA"


,h -ii ana n ra


Pfml1


dn" <^/MI ^# rr~j


*^*'_^k .^k ^L ~. *k ^^f _^


I


I11 -


W ^










product-oriented


approach


to writing.


She believed


the latter


focuses


too much


on surface


errors.


Relatively


spelling


speaking,


, and punctuation


teaching


easy


such fundamental


that


as grammar,


not teaching


writing;


that


teaching


the peripherals


of writing.


It is


misconception


to view writing


as a skill


that


can


"factored


into


subskill


s" (Berthoff,


1981,


25).


In addition,


over-emphasizing


correctness


of student


papers,


teachers


be encouraging


students


to produce


trivial


papers


or to


stop


writing


altogether.


Graves


(1978)


described


the effect


this


kind


of emphasis:


no point


is the learner more


vulnerable


than in


writing.


When a child


writes


, 'My


sister was


hit by


terck


yesterday


red-circled
educational


and the teacher


'terck'


with


standards


no fourth


have


s response
er comment,


been


upheld,


but the


child


writing


often


will


think


process


the writer'


again.


s only


before
Inane
means


taking


part


and apatheti


self


-prote


writing
action. (


Holbrook


(cited


in Emig


, 1983)


added


further


comments


on the


threat


of writing:


Children
misspelt


become


so terrified


particularly


of putting


down a


an unfamiliar word,


that


word


they


don't
child


put down any wor
of 8, who wrote


have


seen


long marvellous


it happen to a
stories. After


year


with


a teacher


wrote


'Please


more


tidy,


'Your


word


spelling is
she stopped


awful


' "S


altogether


loppy'
. She


--and
wrote


never
little


a good
e lies


sentence


a time,


in a


'diary.


'Coming


s school


today


was


saw an elephant.


all she was


damn-well


wasn


going


true.


But that


to write--neat,


Frlmnl oto


K, Tmm.Tl aa, n4 nfl,


1 1 ....e 14-


El


rfl1" A** 4- rf^


irTd


I











A writer writes


to communicate a message,


sometimes


feeling.


A teacher


should


acce


pting


and encouraging


of early


attempts


at writing


and should


notice


the value


of the


expression.


Failure


to notice


message


because


of "too


many


mistakes"


could


have di


sastrous


effects.


Maimon


(1979),


writing


of college


freshman said,


their


instructors


continue


emphasize


an avoidance


error,


then


students


will


finally


learn


to avoid


as many


errors


as possible


not writing


at all"


366).


Untrained


or mistrained


students write


as they


according


to Shaughnessy


(1977)


"because


they


are beginners


must,


like


all beginners,


learn


by making mistakes"


"Instead


of teaching


finished


writing,


Murray


(1982)


added


should


teach


unfinished


writing,


and glory


in its


unfinishedness"


According


to Emig


(1983)


"there


is little


evidence


support


student


that


themes


the persistent


leads


pointing


an elimination of


out of specific


these


errors


errors,


teachers


expend much of


their


energy in


this


futile


unrewarding


reasoned


exercise"


college


94).


freshmen


Furthermore,


still make


as Berthoff


numerous


(1981)


grammatical


mistakes


student


is going


care


very much


about


learning


correct


usage,


proper


agreement,


the mechanics


of spelling


punctuation and


capital


zation


unless


he--or


she--cares


about










a proofreader


and teaches


editing


skills


should


also


keep


this


mind:


There


are many


fine


editors


cannot


write


well,


conversely,


there


are many


good


writers


could


never


become


editors.


In addition,


no student


will


be able


to revise


well


until


they


can write


comfortably


and fluently


(Kirby


Liner


1980).


Students


attitudes


definitely


influence


growth


in writing.


An individual


s predisposition


toward


writing


--positive


negative--is


need


extremely


to be concerned


important


about.


one that


No matter


English


how skilled


educators


or capable


students


are in writing,


if they


believe


they


will


do poorly


if they


choose


to avoid


writing


situations,


then


their


skills


capabilities


matter


little.


Daly


(1985),


based


on his research


on writing


apprehension,


claimed


that writing


desire


is just


important


as writing


skills


in one'


development


as a writer


An individual
to successful


s attitude
writing as


about writing
are his or her


is just
writing


as basic
skills.


no matter


skillful


the individual may


as a


writer,


without


can expect


skills.


a willingness


little more


A positive


than


attitude


engage


the atrophying


about


in writing


one


of composing


writing


associated


with


, and may


even


a critical


precursor


success


sful


development


and maintenance


writing


skills.


Even


a student


who has remained


"somewhat


whole"


because


a healthy private writing


life


enervated


by worries


over


peripherals--spelling,


punctuation,


length"


(Emig,


1983,


p. 94).


Talking


to and fradinr


L.LL


naners


of massive


hostile.


.










write


is a sensitive


process,


and teachers


should


offer


lots


praise


encouragement


for early


efforts.


Classroom


teachers


should


teach


the conventions


of writing--spelling,


capitali-


nation,


punctuation,


usage--but


should


also


keep


them in


perspective.


Once


self-confidence


has been developed


there


plenty


of time


to concentrate


on the "peripherals


of writing.


Summary


To seek


one of the


a better


concerns


to teach


of English


writing


educators


to students


for a number


been


years.


Some


of the main


problems


include


the following:


There


are too


many


handle


students


in English


the paperload;


classrooms


there


is too much


for teachers


emphasis


to adequately


on spelling


grammar


not enough


on actual


writing;


and teachers,


particularly


those


with


tenure,


are ill-prepared


in composition


to sufficiently


teach


students


to write.


Lambdin


(1976)


looked


to the colleges


of education


to "train


teachers


to stop


killing


the natural


enjoyment


children


derive


from


. writing"


181).


The problem,


Lamdin


claimed,


not that


kids


fail


to learn


how to write:


is that many


them


are discouraged


from


practicing


as they


progress


through


school.


Children are


fascinated


by words


and like


see their


language


at work


on paper.


But by


the time


they


reach


junior


high school,


writing


is often


such a


threat


and embarrassment


thomn


th r


IWr .


1 R91 -


own


L1.h.


hh


* 1 _


i rn r I rg nn










blanks


or correct


grammatical


errors


in sentences written


somebody


else.


Many


teachers


emphasize


the latter


which


teaching


editing,


not writing.


In addition,


overemphasizing


"correctness,


" teachers


be contributing


to the development


apprehension in writers.


People


learn


how to write


by writing--a


lot of writing.


Young


people


generally


have


good


imaginations.


The key


to get


them


to unlock


those


ideas


their


thoughts


on paper


with


confidence.


James


Britton


so aptly put


"You


can't


shape


a trickle.


have


to get


the flow


going


before


can shape


Early


personal


communication,


1986).


this


study


short


writing


the students


activities


writing,


that


are presented


are manageable


for the


teacher,


and the teacher


requires


no knowledge


of research


implement


them.
















CHAPTER


RESEARCH


DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY


purpose


of thi


research


was to investigate


the effect


of daily


short


writing


activities


on students


levels


of writing


apprehension


and writing


achievement.


Special


emphasis


was given


to students


beginning


were


of the study.


classified


The sample


as high apprehensives


was comprised


at the


of sixth,


seventh


and eighth grade


students


(nine


intact


classes)


attending


Fort


Clarke


Middl


School


, Gainesville,


Florida.


Three


English


teachers


participated


in the stud


and each


teacher


a control group


an experimental


group


(Exi),


experimental group


(Ex2).


Exl indicated


short


writing


activities


with


no f


eedback,


and Ex2 indicated


short


writing


activity


with


feedback.


following


research


hypotheses


(H1,


, H4)


with


their


respective


questions


(Q1,


were


tested


separately


at the sixth,


seventh,


and eighth grades:


After adjusting


significant


for pr


etest


differences


differences,


.05)


there


among


will


sttest


writing


apprehension


scores


the control,


and Ex2 students.


Will


the frequent


use


short


writing


activities


with


no feedback or


itive


feedback


used


in conjunction


with


one instru


ctional


comment


affect


stud


ents


" levels of


writing


apprehension?


AfrPr nA 4,iatrnn


flA4 nann n t a vs A I a a


nro*na a


^hnaA M-l 1


T-r


~A nn










Will
no fe


the frequent
edback or (b


use of short


itive


writing


feedback


activities


used


with


conjunction


with one
writing


instructional
apprehension o


comment


those


affect students


students


level


are initially


class


sified


as high apprehensives


After


adjusting


pretest


diff


erences


there


will


significant
achievement


differences


scores


.05)


of the control,


among
Exl,


posttest


writing


and Ex2 students.


Will


the frequent


use


short


writing


activities


with


no feedback or


itive


feedback


used


in conjunction


with


one in


structional


comment


affect


student


s' levels


writing


achievement?


After


adjusting


pretest


differences,


there


will


significant
achievement


differences


scores


among


of the initially


high


posttes


appre


t writing


hensive


control,


Exi,


and Ex2 students.


Will


the frequent


no feedback


or (b)


use


short


positive


writing


eedback


activities


used


with


in conjunction


with one
writing


instructional


achievement


comment


of those


affect


stud


students


ents


- levels


are initially


ssified


as high


apprehensives?


To accomplish


purposes


of this


research,


the Daly-Miller


Writing Apprehension Measure


see Appendix


was administered


the beginning


and ending


of a six-week


period


was used


measure


the writing


apprehension


level


any changes


in these


levels,


of middle


school


students.


Compositions written by


students


on one


of four


topi


see


Appendix


at the beginning


and ending


of the


same


six-week


period


were


used


as pretest


posttest


measures


for determining gain


or loss


in students'


achievement


in writing.


The multivariate-analysis-of


-covariance


(MANCOVA) w

differences


as used

among


to control

the students


statistically

which might


confound


initial

differences











Design of


the Study


Random sampling


is the preferred


method


of doing


experimental


research


however,


a quasi-experimental


design was


chosen


for this


study


due to the necessity


of using


intact


school


classes.


research design


selected


the study was


Nonequivalent


Control


-group


Pretest-posttest


Design


(Huck,


Cormier,


Bounds


, 1974).


This


design may


be diagramed


follows:


Y1Y2


Y1Y2


Y1Y2


Y1Y2


Y1Y2


Y1Y2


The diagram


shows


that


three


groups


were


used


(three


rows


the diagram);


each


group


was measured


on two dependent


variables


(Y1Y2)


at the


same


time


before


treatments


X2) were


applied


to the experimental


groups


each group was


then measured


(Y1Y2)


at the


same


time


after


treatment


applied


randomly


and (


to the experimental


assigned


groups


to the three


the experimental


groups


and control


the subjects


were


in the diagram);


groups


not have


pretreatment


sampling


equivalence,


that


groups


were


nonequivalent


(indicated


the horizontal


dashes


separating


trhyio nrlinc -


iQc a4 an 't .na


fnlI 1lr.n TA


'fr anFnh


was


tkran


S- mrma


1 nl i











In the diagram,


two independent


variables


are listed:


indicated


short


writing


activities


with


no f


eedback,


and X2


indicated


short


writing


activities


with


eedback.


Two dependent


variables were


examined


treatment


effects


Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure


(Y1)


was administered


before


and after


treatment


in order


assess


any changes


apprehension


was written


changes


level


before


in writing


between groups


and after


profici


and (b)


treatment


a composition


in order


ency--particularly


(Y2)


assess


in the


areas


general merit


and mechanics--


between groups.


The design


was chosen


so that


research


could


be conducted


natural


assroom settings.


Since


randomization was


possible


every


effort


was made


to employ


groups


that


were


equivalent


as possible.


Teacher differences


, grade


level,


ability


level


were


controlled


in this


study.


In addition,


design allowed


the researcher


to control


the time


when subjects


were measured,


which


subjects


would


be exposed


to treatments,


instrumentation


, and testing.


Pretest,


treatment,


posttest


procedures


were


carried


out at the


same


time,


thus


controlling


for history,


maturation


and subj


reactivity.


In order


control


for teacher


and researcher


bias


treatments


were


randomly


assigned


to two of the three


groups.


Although


the three


groups


were


nonequivalent


terms


nnhn4 dn a n r n o 1 r


a ~ )i t airamanf 1


1~ oirP


xjyf -1 nf


T.T t- i nr


AX7AWt


C


nTl










volunteered


to participate


in the study


a total


of nine


intact


groups.


These


teachers--one


sixth


grade,


one seventh


grade,


one eighth


grade--each


taught


at least


three


periods


of regular


English


daily.


The researcher


randomly


determined


which


classes


would


receive


treatments


having


each


teacher


draw numbers


out of


a box


so that


the first


class


period


drawn


designated


as the control


group,


the second


experimental


group


(Exi),


and the third


was the experimental


group


(Ex2).


This


same


procedure


was followed


for each


teacher.


sum,


the selection


of the subject


population


limited


students


enrolled


in the sixth,


seventh,


and eighth grades


Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


appear


to restrict


generalizability


of the study.


However,


Fort


Clarke Middle


School


students


were


not an exclusive


group


and represented


balanced


samp le


of middle school


children


in the community.


addition,


because


three


different


teachers


volunteered


participation


in the study


and each


teacher


taught


at a different


grade


middle


level,


school


this


study


grades.


representation


It is safe


to conclude


from each


that


of the


the findings


in this


study


could


be generalized


to the


same


type


populations


courses


described


herein.


Pilot


Study


A nilot


study


(nsee


Annendix


I- '


was


conducted


at a central


was


was










There were


no significant


differences


in the


apprehension


level


of students


regard


ess


group


, but the


change


in group means was


in a favorable direction.


Both


experimental


groups


decreased


in apprehension


level


and the


control


group


increased


in apprehension


as was


shown


change


in group means.


No significant


differences


were


noted


writing


achievement


regardless


group.


Further


anal


ysis using


only


the data of


the high


apprehensive


students


revealed


significant


of writing


achieved


students


difference


achievement.


better


among


Students


than students


who did no short


writing


the three


receiving


received


activity


groups


no feedback


feedback


(control


terms


(Exl)


(Ex2)


group).


control


group


achieved


significantly


better


than


Ex2.


The last


result


have


been due


to teacher


and ability


level


differences.


The scoring


procedure


for the writing


achi


evement


measure


was admittedly weak


because


it did


not control


variability


in grade


level


pretest


scores.


scorer


read


each


student


s pre-


and postcompositions


indicated


which


paper


was the better


of the


two.


If there


were


no apparent


differences


in the quality


of either


paper,


scorer was


instructed


to indicate


so by writing


no change.


" Based


on these


results,


three


professional


holistic


scorers


used


a modified


viirs1nn nf t


he f il0a rinh


tho mn4AA1 a


QSa1 l


tn 31 idon


aehrnl











researcher


to control


statistically


any variability


in pretest


scores.


Because


the high


school


was involved


in the writing


enhancement


program,


students


were


accustomed


to writing


frequently.


The researcher


was sufficiently


encouraged


results


of the pilot


study


to continue


the study


at a middle


school


setting where


writing


did not


occur


on a regular


basi


The middle


school


was not involved


in the writing


enhancement


program.


The Sample


Three


teachers,


with


three


English cl


asses


each,


were


involve

intact


in this


English


study.


Thus,


classrooms


the sample


three


sixth grade


was comprised


classes,


of nine

three


seventh grade


asses


and three


eighth


grade


asses.


hundred


thirty-


middle


school


students


enrolled


at Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


Gainesville


, Florida,


were


administered


pre-


tests.


from


Because


the cl


ass


of incompl

or failure


ete data due

to complete


to absenteeism,


two-thirds


withdrawal


of the short


writing


activity


for students


involved


in the


treatment


groups,


only


221 students


were


administered


posttests.


Of the 15


students


dropped


from


the study,


had missing


pretest


data,


missing


20 short

rnmnl to


posttest


writing

at 1 ft


data,


activity


9n wrartlna


and only


Of the 6


art-1r4 r


students


students


nl v


not complete


who did

at-tiifannt


I


P











reasons why


students


not write


an activity were due


absenteeism.


The composition


of subjects


according


to grade


and sex i


presented


in Table


3-1 and grade


race


in Table


3-2.


TABLE


Composition


of Subject


Sample


Grade


and Sex


Grade


Total


Males


Females


percent
Males


Percent
Females


\V 6
-;7
8
Total


TABLE


Composition of


Subject


Sample


by Grade


and Race


Percent


Percent


Percent


Grade


Black


White


Other


Black


White


Other


Total


total number


of subjects were


grouped


according


to grade


level


in order


to control


for teacher


bias


and grade


level


Sf f -h7a nn. Te nl ', n


Th.la


rl t f P a ran nr C


^^t-1

A/^T^4t ^t^/^/


4-1--A A


C~ rrrnn










grade


regular


English


classes.


composition


of students


according


to control


and experimental


groups


is presented


Table


3-3.


TABLE


Composition of


Subject


Sample


by Group


Grade control Exi Ex2 Total


6 i 28 22 25 75
7 29 26 24 79
8 24 25 18 67
Total 81 73 67 221


The Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


population


was selected


the study for


the following


reasons


The school


setting


was conveniently


located


for the


researcher.


Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


was not involved


in the Writing


Enhancement


Program;


high schools


throughout


state were


involved


in the


program.


The principal


focus


of the Language


Arts


Program was


with


grammar


instruction and


not with


process


of writing


Appendix


G for


a listing


of their


curriculum).


Most


studies


involving


writing


apprehension


have


been done


college


research


settings,


and recommendations


to be conducted


at lower


have


grade


been made


levels.


see










Description


The Writing


of the Instruments


Apprehension Measure


Writing


apprehension


was assessed


subj


ects


responses


the 26-item version of


the Writing Apprehension Measure


Appendix B)


devised


Daly


and Miller


(197


Each


item on


instrument


deals


with


some


form of


apprehension


about writing.


specifically,


statements


focus


respondents "


perceptions


their


anxiety


about


act of writing;


their


likes


dislikes


about


writing


responses


they


peer,


teacher,


and professional


evaluations


evalu


of writing'


nations

" (Daly


of their writing;


1985


and their


This


self


empirically


based


standardized


self


-report


instrument


uses


a Likert-type


scale


format


with


five


levels


of possible


responses


for each


statement


ranging


from


stronglyl


agree"


to "strongly


disagree


A single


score


be obtained


by using


the formula


Writing


Apprehension


= 78 +


Positive


Scores


Scores


(Daly


Miller,


1975a,


p. 246)


Scores


were


calculated


in this


study


that

while


a low


a high


core

score


of 26 indicated a

e of 130 indicated


highly


apprehensive writer


a low apprehensive,


or very


confident


writer.


The Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure


is used


in most


research


involving


writing


apprehension and


has been found


highly


reliabi


across


verse


samples


of respondents.


The internal


nAnnrAonna4 nr Manawira ..


see


'Pha I XT-M- I I Q-"


TWr U'trn/


n rfrrt 4 c? n t^Ar


I Il


#- T-










found


figures


close


to that


value


(Daly,


1985


, p. 45).


Test-retest

correlation


reliability


.92 in


has also


one study


been

that


shown t

extended


o be high


over


with


a one-week


period


(Daly


Miller,


1975b).


Studies


that


have


extended


over


three


months


have


found


test-retest


coefficients


greater


than


(Daly


, 1985,


p. 47).


Writing


Achievement


Achievement


in writing


was assessed


the holistic


scoring


pretest


posttest


compositions


using


a modified


version


the Diederich


Scale


(Diederich,


1974).


The Diederich


Scale


(see


Appendix

(CES), w


also known


as developed


as the Compositi

the researchers


Evaluation Scale


at the Educational


Testing


Service


(ETS)


and has been


regularly used


to evaluate


quality


Diederich'


of compositions.


s factor-analytic


The validity


study


of the CES


of teachers'


stems


reasons


from


their


judgments


of compositions


(Myers,


1980).


Holistic


writing


scoring


greater


assumes


than any


that


of its


the whole


parts


a piece


no aspect


writing


skill


can


be judged


independently.


English


teachers


recognize


good


writing


when


they


see it


but they may


have


difficulty in

is understood


quality


I giving


a verbal


and agreed


of particular


description


all.


traits,


Teachers


they


of writing

may not a


can rate


ability


gree


papers


that


on the


in much


I i *


TAr .)T ak n 4 .4 --4 a -


can


rk nn r ~f-rr


'T1


IICAYA










Holistic


researched
personnel


scoring


over


techniques


past


have


twenty


of ETS in connection


been
years


with


extends


ively


particularly


essay


exercises


used i
known,


.n various


Coll


for example


ege
that


Board


Examinations.


interrater


It is


reliability


correlations


agree
given
raters


with on
essay)


(measures
e another
reach as


extent


on the rating


high


are given special


to which
assigned


raters


as .70 to .80 and above


training


sessions


their work.


prior


"The


general


consensus


seems


to be that,


despite


many


research


issues


and doubtful


procedures


holistic


scoring


still


the best


assess


writing"


(Myers,


1980,


p. 4).


A modified


version


of the scoring


sheet


follows


represents


the various


criteria


that


experienced


English


teachers


use in evaluating


writing.


eight


factors


that


are listed


short


forms


of the


names


the five


factors


in judgments


writing


ability


revealed


the factor-analysis


except


that


mechanics


factor


is broken


down


into


its various


distinguishable


components


usage


punctuation,


and spelling.


Handwriting


added


because


raters


scored


handwritten compositions.


Middle


General


High


Merit


Ideas
Organization
Diction
Style

Mechanics


Usage
Punctuation
Cnnl 14l.'


are


was










At the right


are spaces


for subtotals


scores


on the first


four


four


factors,


which


which


are termed


are termed


"General


Mechanics


Merit,


and then


on the last


a space


for the


of these


two,


the total


rating.


Note


that,


a student


received


the lowest


possible


score


on everything,


the total


would


be 10;


if all the scores were


in column


two,


the total


would


be 20;


similar


totals


for the other


three


columns


would


be 30,


More weight


is given


to ideas


and organization


because


the emphasis


placed


on those


areas


in classrooms


today.


Daly


asserted

which co


that


"many


tribute


of the most


to writing


(e.g


important

* the idea


competencies

s) are not,


and skills

and indeed


probably


could


not,


assess


ed through


an objective


testing


procedure"


(Daly


1978,


p. 13).


Selection


of Readers


Teachers


at the high school


level


suggested


that


the record


keeping


and checking


papers


from


both


experimental


groups


could


be done


volunteer.


an aide,


Because


of this


a student


suggestion,


assistant,


two parent


or a parent


volunteers


were


writing


obtained


to do the checking


activities


at the middle


and record


school.


keeping


parent


of the short


in charge of


papers


from Exi


placed


a check


on the top of


each


paper,


was emphasized


that


nothing


was to be written


on any


of the


papers.

problems


Papers were

in attitude


read

could


on an intermittent


be detected.


basis


so that


one occasion.


when


sum


V- L










researcher was


phoned,


the teachers


were


notified,


the students


were


told


to discontinue


that


behavior


and the problem stopped.


students


obscenities


other


were


apologetic


see if


parent


anyone


who was


and admitted


was actually


responsible


that


they wrote


reading


papers.


for reading


papers


from


had been a


college


English


teacher


seven


years


four-year


college


in Virginia


and a community


college


English


teacher


for half


a year.


She left


teaching


years


when


her children were


born and


was


eager


to get


involved


as a parent


volunteer.


responsibilities


included


keeping


a daily


placing


a positive


statement


on each


paper


complemented


instructional


comment.


The positive


remark was


appropriate


the quality


of the


paper


: it was


as trivial


as "ni


handwriting"


or as glowing


as "super


paper.


" The instructional


comment


response


to an idea


or was


the first


error


detected


regardless


magnitude; in

inconsistency


other words,

or as simplis


was as sophisticated


as a spelling


as a stylistic


error.


The researcher made


periodic


phone


call


to the


parents


make


sure


their


involvement was


going


as planned.


parent


charge


of the


papers


from


Exl observed


that


the student


became


more


careless


in their writing


as time


passed.


parent


charge


of the


papers


from


Ex2 observed


that


the students


were


writing


better


as time


passed.


Both


parents


entered


a check


next


to the child


s name


in a record


'a


book sifnifvin


that


the activity


one


was











completed


at least


20 of the short writing


activities


were


used.


Data


Collection


Procedure


Permission was


obtained


from


the Human


Subj ects


Committee of


the University


of Florida


before


the investigation


was started.


principal


of Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


gave


permission for


the study

parental


to take

consent


place

letter


at that

used fo


site


and agreed


r the high


school


to sign

pilot


a similar


study


see


Appendix


Three


teachers


from Fort


Clarke


Middle


School


agreed


to participate


in the study


one sixth


grade


English


teacher,


one seventh grade


English


teacher,


one eighth grade


English

training


teacher.

session


teachers


at which


time


participated

the "teacher


in a


one-hour


instructions"


(see


Appendix


were


explained.


Teachers


administered


protests


on the first


of the


second


six-week marking


period


and the


posttests


on the first


of the third


six-week marking


period.


During


pretest


activity


students were


instructed


to write


a composition


on one


of four


prompts


(see


Appendix


Describe


a Funny


Experience,


Argue


For or Against


the seventh


Period


Day,


Describe


Qualities


a Good


Teacher,


or Make


Your


Topic.


Teachers


were


asked


to give


each student


three


sheets


of lined


notebook


paper


and have


the students


their


name,


date


and class


A-L -- -- --


fla- 1 .t n-


1 rA r a o r n a n aL a r C .. n an v r- C flf na A


r


/nr dankl~


-- A-


v\la* aA


4-^a-fv


nnr 4,.,


I











for their


names


, date,


and class


period.


Students


their


responses.


Teachers


monitored


time


so that


students


would


have


at leas t


10 minutes


left


in the 50-minute


period


to complete


the apprehension instrument.


researcher


collected


the data


on the


same


protests


were


administered.


posttest


a change


that


activity


in composition


the modes


followed


topic.


of discourse


same


The holistic


procedure with


scorers


not be mixed


only


recommended


posttest


so the


following


adj us tment


was made


for the study:


if students


wrote


a descriptive


paper


their


pretest


composition,


then


they wrote


a descriptive


if students


wrote


paper


for their


a persuasive


paper


posttest

for their


composition;

pretest


composition,


then


they


wrote


a persuasive


paper


for their


posttest


composition;


and (c)


if students


wrote


on a


topic


their


allowed


choice


for their


to choose


pretest


their own


composition,


topic


their


then


they were


posttest


composition.


prompts


for the


posttest


compositions


complemented


ones


given for


pretest


compositions


Describe


an Embarrassing


Moment,


Argue


For or Against


Homework,


Describe


the Qualities


a Good


Parent,


or Make


Your


Topic.


At this


point


the control


groups


completed


their


involvement


with


the study.


It was


emphasized


that


the Control


groups


were


not to do


of the short


writing


activities


based


a- L, tJ. ,Lt1,'


_- _1 A- -t --. A


"bubbled-in"


- I


L* *_










Classes


participated


period


designated


in daily


or a total


activities


were


as Ex1 and classes


short writing


of 30 days.


included


see


designated


activities


Seventy-f iv

Appendix A)


short


as Ex2 both


a six-week

writing


so teachers


could


choose


those


activities


which


suited


them


best


each


day.


Teachers were


assured


that


each activity would


take


between


three


to five


minutes


to complete,


and the activity


was not to


interfere with .the


regular


lesson plan for


that


day.


Teachers


were


encouraged


to use the three


to five


minutes


to perform


their


administrative duties


so that


instructional


time would


not be


used


for the writing


of these


short


activities.


Teachers


were


told


not to force


papers


student


were


collected


to do the short writing


each


activities.


and returned


following


papers


day.


each


parent


afternoon


volunteers


return


had their


papers


children


each


pick up


morning


before

each


school


class.


so that


paren


teachers

t marked


could


distribute


all of the


papers


papers


from Exl,


regardless


of grade


level;


the other


parent marked


all of the


papers


from Ex2


(see


Appendix


for teacher


parent


instructions).


The Rating


Procedure


compositions


were


coded


and shuffled


investigator;


students'


names


were


on the


papers.


*1 rn,~n*.4 n4-A~,~S an 4 1 aA nfl ,JIn. C:~CA t. 1 AA .4 S


4 .In.. @ *4 r.1.-


^^---- 1^


I ^^1. 1 ^1-


..,,U -I










numbers


were


generated


using


a random


table


of numbers.


Those


students


students


had taken


who had taken


pretest


posttest


no posttest


no pretest


and those


were


eliminated


compositions


from


were


the study.


thoroughly


remaining


shuffled


pretest


together


posttest


in order


prevent


raters


from detecting


whether


a paper was written


at the


beginning


of the study


or at the ending


of the study.


It is


standard


practice


to mix grade


levels


from fourth


through


twelfth


grade


same


readings.


reading


Myers


ensures


(1980)


that


noted


range


, "Putting


of writing


papers


skill


into


will


expressed


in the distribution


of the scores"


42).


The 461


papers


were divided


into


21 folders


accompanied


21 scoring


sheets.


Three


professional


holistic


scorers


agreed


to assist


in the


study


were


financially


compensated


their


participation.


After


reviewing


the procedures


for the pilot


study,


these


scorers


suggested


that


the middle


school


students


should


also


be allowed


to choose


their


pretest


composition


topics,


but the


posttest


compositions


should


be preselected


the researcher.


example,


if students


wrote


a descriptive


paper


for their


pretest


composition,


then


they were


to write


a descriptive


paper


their


posttest


composition.


If students


wrote


a persuasive


paper


their


nprasl fiv y


pretest


naner


composition,


for their


then


nnfttest


they were


rnmnosit on.


to write a


If students











posttest


composition.


This


suggestion


was made


in order


to pair


students with


the mode


of discourse


they


chose


for their pretest


composition


so similar


Each scorer


read


papers


would


papers


be paired.


in two Saturday


sessions,


week


apart.


The three


scorers


had been


trained


together


through


the University


Florida


, had worked


together


several


years,


participated


on state


funded


holistic


scoring


events


such


the Statewide


Assessment


Test


(SAT)


and the College


Level


Academic


Skill


Test


(CLAST),


had been


teachers,


and had their


master


s degrees.


A modified


version


the Diederi


ch Rating


Scale


Appendix


was


used


in this


study


as a holi


stic


scoring


uide,


and the three


scorers


were


provided


with


instructions


defining


each


point


on the scale.


Readers were


trained


together


and read


together


in the


same


room


under


common


direction


since


that


most


reliable method


of scoring writing


samples


(Myers


, 1980,


The investigator


chose


samples


which served


prototypes


for each


category


of high


, middle,


and low papers


These


papers


were


duplicated


and served


as practice


papers


the readers


After


each


group


of practi


papers


had been


rated,


they were


compared.


A head


scorer


was appointed


and monitored


what


happened during


the reading.


head


scorer


conducted


short


discussion


whenever


there


was a "splitter,


a paper


that


* a ->i as A.. ..-.S


-A .3


-- -_ A- -. -


I S L |


one


see


1


I


L


* I. *










Each


scorer


read


each


composition


and scored


on the


supplied scales;

The papers were


thus

read


each


quickly,


paper was


each


read


scorer


at least


taking


three


no more


times.

than


five minutes


per paper.


Scorers


marked


scale only;


corrections


There


was


or marks


room for


sort


the rating


were


of three


placed


on the


papers


compositions.


each


sheet.


After


three


scales


were


finished


, the


scorer


each


sheet


the bottom of


the stack


until


papers


had been rated.


Once


stack of


papers


had been


read


and scored,


readers


passed


folder


to the reader


on the right.


After


the complete scoring


a folder,


the investigator


summed


totals


and notified


the table


leader


any discrepancies


in scoring.


table


leader made


the final


decision


took frequent


regarding


breaks


were


outliers

supplied


or extreme


meals


scores.


and snacks


Scorers

in order


to control


rater


fatigue.


When


scorers


began scoring


the writing


samples,


periodic


checks


were


conducted


with


the practice


papers


ensure


interscorer


reliability.


Charles


Cooper


(1977)


made


this


point


regarding


the reliability


scorers


When
when


raters
they a


scorers


.re trained


are from


with


similar


a holistic


backgrounds
scoring


guide-either


one


on the spot--they


they


borrow or


can achieve


devise


nearly


for themselves


perfect


agreement


in choosing


the better


pair


essays;


and they


achieve


scoring


reliabilities


in the high eighties


low nineties


on their


summed


scores


from multiple


pieces


of student'


writing.


can






69



Data Analysis


Subjects


writing


were


apprehension


classified


as high,


on the basis


moderate


their


, or low in


responses


on the


Daly-Miller


Writing


Apprehension Measure.


Responses


were


summed


for each


person so


that


a low


score


always


indicated


high


apprehension and


a high


score


indicated


apprehension.


Respondents


group


scoring


one standard


apprehension score


per grade


deviation


level


below


were


or above


operationally


defined


as high and


, respectively,


in apprehension.


Individuals


whose scores


fell


within


one standard


deviation


mean


were


classified


as moderates.


independent


variables


for thi


study were


three


grade


levels


(teachers)


and two methods


of utili


zing


short


writing


activities


in the classroom:


one without


feedback


and the other


with


feedback.


two dependent


variables


included


levels


of students"


writing


apprehension and


overall


quality


students


writing


achievement.


Apprehension


and composition data


were


collected


from each


of the three


groups


before


and after


their


involvement


in the


study.


activities


amount


in the


of change


areas


elicited


of apprehension and


the short


writing


achievement


(first


and third


hypotheses)


were


measured


and compared


using


MANCOVA


design.


This


method


provided


for the control


of several


4., A an 1 tier a1a no 'Mi


onni l c4 aO


f aourorl


i ^ann T^ra^Ant~lfT


aT* V .- 1kl a


F










apprehension and


achievement,


were


analyzed


simultaneously


rather


than


separately


because


of the


strong


possibility


correlation


between


apprehension


and achievement.


Sowell


Casey


(1982)


explained:


To analyze


the data


separately


run the ri


sk of


getting


stati


situation


stically


significant


is comparable


results


to doing


a long


error.
series


t-tests


with


the result


that


some


t-tests


significant


just


chance.


Performing


more


tests


same


data


increases


the probability


that


result will
variation.


appear


(pp.


to be


signifi


cant


because


chance


122-123)


The MANCOVA was


used


to control


statistic


cally


initial


differences


present


in the students


which might


confound


differences


among


the three


groups.


The dependent


variables,


scores


on the writing


apprehension


posttest


and the


scores


on the


post


composition,


were


adjusted


on the basis


of the covariates.


covariates were


the scores


on the writing


apprehension


pretest


and the


scores


on the composition


pretest.


The high


apprehensives


as operationally


defined,


in each


of the nine


groups


served


as a selective


sample


for additional


analyses


stated


in the second


significance


and fourth


was selected


hypotheses.


for all anal


yses


The .05 level

of data.


Follow-up-anal


yses


using


the conservative


Scheffe


procedure


multiple


comparisons


was used


to determine


significant


differences


for each


group mean.


are
















CHAPTER


DATA ANALYSIS


RESULTS


OF THE STUDY


This


study was


designed


to test


the effect


of short


writing


activities


on students


' levels


of writing


apprehension, atd


writing


achievement


with


special


emphasis


on students


were


initially

contains


classified

the statistic


as high apprehensives.

cal treatment of the d


This


ata and


chapter

findings


relative


to (a)


the effect


of short writing


activities


on writing


apprehension at


the middle


school


level,


and (b)


the effect


short writing


activities


on students


writing


achievement


at the


middle


school


level.


The Statistical


Treatment


of the Data


Introduction


The study was


limited


to nine


regular middle


school


English


classes


three


at the sixth,


three


at the seventh,


and three


the eighth grade


levels.


For each


grade


level,


there


was a


control


group,


an experimental


group


(Exl)


and an experimental


group


(Ex2).


Students


in Exi


wrote


daily


short


writing


activities


and received


no feedback,


only


a check


indicating


activity


had been completed.


Students


in Ex2


wrote


daily


short


writing activities


and received


feedback


in the form of











writing


achievement -were


collected


from


the students


in all nine


asses


Writing


Apprehension


One of the major


purposes


of this


study was


to determine


effect


of short


writing


activities


on students


level


of writing


apprehension.


students


In order


complete


to determine


the Daly-Miller


an effect


existed,


Apprehension Measure


at the


beginning


and ending


a six-week


period.


These


tests


were


used


as pre-


posttest


measures


for determining


gain


students


" apprehension


in writing.


analysis


data


involved


two major


steps.


First,


apprehension scores


were


calculated


for each student


so that


respondents


writing


could


apprehension


be classified


on the basi


as high,


of their


rate,


responses


or low in


on the


pretest


instrument.


Second,


a multivn~iateranalysis-of-


covariance


(MANCOVA)


with


the apprehension


scores


of students


the dependent


variable


and the preapprehension scores


preachievement

determine the


scores


as the covariates


following:


was performed


a significant


in order


difference


existed


among


three


the adjusted


groups,


mean


and b)


apprehension scores


a significant


of subjects


difference


in the


existed among


the adjusted


mean


apprehension


scores


of the initially


high


apprehensive


subj ects


in the three


groups.


r- Ir _- 1 .


A-


_ A- -a -r-- ----C


or 1


oss


. _


L


~


-s


-- M










Analysis


of Apprehension


Data


A computation


of total


apprehension


scores


and the


difference


for each


student


was performed.


Appendix


shows


each


sixth,


seventh


and eighth


grade


student


the apprehension


pre-


posttest scores


sixth grade,


and the difference


mean apprehension


score


in scores.


is 87.23


In the


and the


standard


deviation


is 17.29


= 85.69


= 17.29).


In the


seventh grade,


the mean apprehension


score


88.87


and the


standard


deviation


18.25 (X


= 88.87


= 18.25)


In the


eighth


grade


mean


apprehension


score


is 80.16


and the


standard


deviation


is 18.04


= 80.16,


= 18.04).


In Table


the total


apprehension


pre-


posttest


scores


(high,


moderate,


and low)


are shown for


each


grade


level


group;


high


apprehensives


are identified.


TABLE


Total


Pre-


and Postapprehension


Scores


Group


and Grade


Grade


Group


Preapprehension
High Moderate L


Postapprehension
High Moderate Lo











The trend


scores


reveal


that


students


apprehension


be reduced,

investigated


albeit

in all


only slightly,

areas except


using


either method


for those students


already


designated


as low apprehensives


in grade


seven.


A comparison of


pre-


and postapprehension means


grade


level


is shown in


Table


4-2.


TABLE


Pre- and


Postapprehension Means


by Grade


Level


High
Apprehensives


Source


rate


Apprehensives


Low
Apprehensives


Grade


Preapprehension
Postapprehension


62.417
86.333


86.280
94.160


113.769
114.308


Grade


Preapprehension
Postapprehension


59.461
69.615


89.711
91.654


113.071
111.571


Grade


Preapprehension
Postapprehension


52.091
61.818


80.295
85.295


105.417
106.750


In order


to determine


the significance


of gain


students


' apprehension


in writing,


various


statistical


procedures


from


the Statistical


Analysis


System


(SAS)


were


performed


to test


the null


hypotheses.


* A --


can


or 1


OSs


I I 1


II


. I










posttest


writing


apprehension


scores


of the control,


and Ex2


students.


The MANCOVA design


was used


to control


statistically


initial


differences


present


in the students


which might


confound


differences


among


the three


groups


per grade


level.


covariates were


scores


on the writing


apprehension


pretest


and the


scores


on the composition


pretest.


The dependent


variable,


scores


on the postDaly-Miller


Apprehension Measure,


was adjusted


on the basis


of the covariates.


After


checking


possible


significant


two-way


interactions,


variables


rerun.


the model


was


The results


reduced


of this


to include


analysis


are given


in Table


4-3.


TABLE


Summary


of MANCOVA Postapprehension


Source SS df MS F PR>F


Grade


Group
Preapprehension
Preachievement


3804


.145
.625


139.092


3804


.072
.625


139.092


0.00
18.37
0.67


0.9996
0.0001
0.4153


Error


14497


.919


.113


Grade


Group
Preapprehension
Preachievement


Error


554.695


12190
6


1671


.140
.589
.128


277.348


12190
6


.140
.589


149.20


0.0389
0.0001
0.7772


22.612











Table


4-3--continued.


Grade


Group
Preapprehension
Preachievement


Error


417.360


11087.933


208.680


11087


38.568


6200.699


.933


38.568
100.011


110.87


0.39


0.1327
0.0001
0.5369


In Table


the calculated


- ratio


groups


in the


sixth


grade


is 0.00


which


not significant


at the .05 level


probability.


The model


accounts


for 30.5% of the variance


grade


six.


The calculated


- ratio


groups


in the seventh


grade


is 3.39,


which


is significant


at the .05 level


probability.


The model


accounts


for 72.0%


of the variance


grade


seven.


The calculated


- ratio


groups


in the eighth


grade


is 2.09,


which


not significant


at the .05 level


probability.


The model


accounts


for 71.6% of


the variance


grade


eight.


Consequently


, the table


discloses


that


differences


among


groups


were


not statistically


significant


at the sixth


and eighth grade


levels


, but were significant


at the seventh grade


level.


In short,


posttest


writing


apprehension


scores


support


the hypothesis


that


there


significant


difference


in the


mean


performance


of subjects


among


the three


groups


for the sixth


and eighth grades,


but there


significant


difference


in the mean


performance


of subjects


among


the three


groups


for the seventh


grade.


Thus,


the null











In Table


4-4,


the specific


group differences


for the seventh


graders


reveals


that


Ex1 improved


significantly when


compared


the control


group.


In other


words,


students


daily


short


writing


activities


and received


no feedback


became


significantly


more


confident


in their writing


skills


than


the students


who did


not do daily


short


writing


activities.


There


are no significant


differences


noted


between


Ex1 and Ex2 or between


the control


group


and Ex2.


TABLE


Summary


of MANCOVA Postapprehension


by Group


- Grade


for HO:


Parameter


Estimate


Parameter=0


PR >


Std Error
f Estimate


Control
Control


vs Exl
vs Ex2
vs Ex2


-6.254
-4.911
1.343


-2.46
-1.94


0.52


0.016
0.057
0.604


2.539
2.536


.577


Hypothesis


After


adjusting


pretest


differences,


there will


no significant


differences


.05)


among


posttest


writing


apprehension


scores


of the initially


high


apprehensive


control


and Ex2 students.


The MANCOVA design


was used


to control


statistically


initial


differences


present


in the students


which might


confound


differences


among


the three


groups


of high apprehensive


grade


level.


The covariates were


scores


on the writing










covariates


the model


After


was reduced


checking


all possible


to include


two-way


significant


interactions,


variables


rerun


using


only


the data


of those


students


identified


as hish


apprehensives


at the beginning


of the study


results


this


analysis


are given


Tabl


4-5.


TABLE


Summary


of MANCOVA Postapprehension


- High Apprehensives


Source SS df MS F PR>F


Grade


Group
Preapprehension
Preachievement


Error


442.040
62.801


3316


221.020
62.801


.423
.629


0.6454


7266
9106


.423


473.804


Grade


Group
Preapprehension
Preachievement


Error


761.845
135.743
65.443


1584


380.922
135.743
65.443
198.122


1.92


.2081
.4318


0.5813


Grade


Group
Preapprehension
Preachievement


Error


60.455
455.447
218.291
228.890


30.228
445.447
218.291
32.699


13.93
6.68


.2161
.0073
.0363


In Table


the calculated


- ratio


for the sixth grade


groups


of students


identified


as high apprehensive


at the


beginning


of the study


is 0


.47,


which


not significant


at the











identified


as high


apprehensive


at the beginning


of the study


1.92


which


is not significant


at the .05 level


of probability.


The model


accounts


for 36.0%


the variance


for grade


seven


high apprehensive


students.


The calculated


- ratio


for the


eighth


grade


groups,


of stud


ents


identified


as high


apprehensive


at the beginning


of the study


is 1.85


which


is not significant


at the


.05 level


of probability.


The model


accounts


for 83.0%


of the variance


for grade


eight


high apprehensive


students.


Consequently


the table discloses


that


the differences


among


groups


were


not statistical


y significant


at the sixth


, seventh,


and eighth g

apprehension


rade


levels.


scores


support


In short,


the hypothes


posttest

is that


writing


there


significant


difference


in the mean


performance


of subjects


initially


identified


as high


apprehensive


among


the three


groups.


Thus,


the null


hypothesi


was


retained


for all grades.


Writing


Achievement


In addition


to investigating


the effect


of short


writing


activities


on students'"


writing


apprehension


, the purpose of


this


study was


to investigate


the effect


short


writing


activities


on students -


the beginning


writing achievement.


one at the ending


a six-week


papers,


period,


one at


were


written


students


on assigned


topi


in order


to determine


an effect


existed.


Students


papers


were


used


as pre-











Appendix


whereby


paragraphs were


evaluated


on eight


items,


tone


focusing


primarily


on general


merit


and the other


focusing


primarily


on mechani


Pre-


and posttest


papers


were


collected


from


the students


in all nine


classes.


analysis


comparison


of data


of the ratings


involved


of Rater


three major


, Rater


steps.


, and Rater


First,


C was


made


to determine


the degree


of relationship among


the three


ratings.


Cautions


were


taken


to prevent


raters


from detecting


which


papers were


protests


and which were


post


ests .


Second


computation of


total


scores


and the difference


for each


student


was


performed


student.


in order


And third


to identify


a MANCOVA with


growth


scores


the total


of each


paper


growth


scores


students


as the dependent


variable


and the


preapprehension scores


and preachievement


scores


as the


covariates


was


performed


in order


to determine


the following:


a significant


difference


existed


among


the adjusted


mean


performance of


subjects


in the three


groups,


and (b)


significant


difference


existed


among


the adjusted


mean


performance of


initially


high apprehensive


subjects


in the three


groups.


Hypotheses


Following


for the study


the results


are stated


of the comparison


in null


raters


form.

, a summary


the findings


follows


each


hypothesis


see











Rater


A correlation of


total


scores


on pre-


posttests


on each


section--general


merit


and mechanics--using


Pearson


Product


r was


performed


to determine


rater


reliability.


Total


paper


pretest


scores


ranged


from


to 48 for Rater


from


to 48


for Rater


and from


to 47 for Rater


Pearson


r and level


of significance


for total


paper


scores


for the


two sections,


general merit


and mechanics


for all three


raters


is shown


in Table


4-6.


Scoring


reliabilities


are quite


high


= +.69


to +.82)


for summed


scores


TABLE


Rater


Reliability


Diederich


Rat er


Rater


Rater


Scale


Pearson


Pearson


Pearson


Total
Total


Paper


Paper,


, Pretest


Posttest


.82'


General
General


Merit,
Merit,


Pretest
Posttest


Mechanics
Mechanics


Pretest
Posttest


Analysis


of Composition Data


A computation


of total


composition


scores


and the


difference


each


student


was performed.


Appendix


shows


each


sixth,


seventh,


and eighth grade


student


the total


- a- -1 --A- 1------------------- Tn .. -


L L -- L-


___I_


m *-


^I











in all


areas


except


for high and


moderate


y apprehensive


students


in grade


There


no change


noted


in writing


achievement


for high


apprehensive


sixth graders


and there


slight


improvement


in writing


achievement


noted


for moderately


apprehensive


sixth graders


A comparison


pre-


postwriting


achievement


means


grade


level


is shown in


Table


4-7.


TABLE


Pre-


and Postachievement


Means


by Grade


Level


High
Apprehensives


Source


Moderate


rehensi


ves


Apprehens ives


Grade


Preachievement
Postachievement


20.722
20.722


23.753
25.681


31.257
30.179


Grade


Preachievement
Postachievement


23.000
21.233


24.224
22.853


25.476
24.118


Grade


Preachievement
Postachievement


24.697
24.666


28.273
27.364


31.581
31.000


In order


to determine


the significance


gain


students


from


- achievement


the Statistical


in writing


, various


Analysis


SAS)


statistical


were


procedures


performed


or 1


oss











posttest


writing


achievement


scores


of the control,


and Ex2


students.


The MANCOVA was


used


to control


statistical


y any


initial


differences


present


in the students


which might


confound


differences


among


the three


groups


per grade


level.


covariates


were


scores


on the writing


apprehension pretest


and the


scores


on the


compos


ition


pretest.


The dependent


variable


scores


on the


post


composition,


was adjusted


the basi


two-way


of the covariates


interactions,


After


the model


was


checking


reduced


all possible


to include


significant


variables


rerun.


The results


of this


anal


are given


in Table


4-8.


TABLE


Summary


of MANCOVA Postachievement


Source SS df MS F PR>F


Grade


Group
Preachievement
Preapprehens ion
Error


150.726
963.152
36.527


1764


75.363
963.152
36.527
25.203


.209


0.0567


38.22


.0001
.2327


Grade


Group
P reachievement
Preapprehension


Error


.560


835.944
19.046
1671.128


70.280
835.944
19.046
22.612


0.0506


36.97


.0001
.3617











Table


4-8--continued.


Grade


Group
Preachievement
Preapprehension
Error


47.950
685.629
128.428
1895.456


23.975
685.629
128.428
30.572


0.78
22.43
4.20


0.4610
0.0001
0.0446


In Table


4-8,


the calculated


- ratio


groups


in the


sixth


rade


is 2


.99,


which


is not significant


at the .05 level


probability.


The model


accounts


for 50.1%


of the variance


for grade


six.


calculated


- ratio


groups


in the


seventh


grade


is 3.11


which


not significant


at the .05 level


probability.


The model


accounts


for 37.4%


of the variance


for grade


seven.


The calculated


- ratio


groups


in the


eighth


grade


is 0.78


which


not significant


at the .05 level


of probability.


The model


accounts


for 42.9%


of the variance


for grade


eight.


Consequently


, the table discloses


that


differences


among


groups


were


not statistically


significant


.05)


at the sixth,


seventh,


and eighth grade


levels .


short,


the posstest


writing


achievement


scores


support


the hypothesis


that


there


no significant


difference


in the mean


performance


of subjects


among


the three


groups.


Thus


the null


hypothesis


is retained


for all grades.


Hypothesis


After


adjusting


pretest


differences,


there will


no significant


differences


among











The MANCOVA


differences


was used


present


to control


in the students


statistically

which might co


initial


found


differences


among


the three


groups


of high apprehensives


grade


level


apprehension


covariates


pretest


and the


were


scores


scores


on the writing


on the composition


pretest


The dependent


variable,


scores


on the


post


composition,


adjusted


on the basi


of the covariates


After


checking


possible


significant


two-way


interactions,


variables


rerun


the model


was


using


reduced


the data


to include


of those


students


identified


as high apprehensive


at the beginning


the study


The results


this


anal


are given


in Tabl


4-9.


TABLE


Summary


of MANCOVA Postachievement


- High Apprehensives


Source SS df MS F PR>F


Grade 6

Group 88.368 2 44.184 1.84 0.2276
Preachievement 158.423 1 158.423 6.61 0.0370 *
Preapprehension 0.009 1 0.009 0.00 0.9855
Error 167.866 7 23.981

Grade 7

Group 7.212 2 3.606 0.19 0.8309
Preachievement 318.973 1 318.973 16.77 0.0035 *
Preapprehension 1.678 1 1.678 0.09 0.7740
Error 152.153 8 19.019

Grade 8


was











In Table


4-9,


the calculated


- ratio


for the sixth grade


groups of

beginning


students


identified


of the study


1.84


as high

, which


apprehensive


at the


not significant


at the


.05 level


of probability.


model


accounts


for 62.0%


of the


variance


for grade


six high


apprehensive


students.


calculated


- ratio


for the seventh


grade


groups


of students


identified


0.19


as high


which


apprehensive


not significant


at the beginning


at the .05 level


of the study


of probability.


The model


accounts


for 69.0%


of the variance


for grade


seven


high apprehensive


students.


The calculated


- ratio


for the


eighth grade


groups


of students


identified


as high


apprehensive


at the beginning


of the study


0.05


which


not significant


at the .05 level


of probability.


The model


accounts


for 50.4%


of the variance


for grade


eight


high apprehensive


students.


Consequently,


the table


discl


oses


that


the differences


among


groups


seventh,


are not statistically


and eighth grade


significant


level


.05)


In short,


at the sixth,


posttest


writing


achievement


scores


support


the hypothesis


that


there


no significant


difference


mean


performance


of subjects


initially identified


as high apprehensive


among


the three


groups.


Thus,


the null


hypothesis


retained


for all grades.


Post


Hoc Analyst


Those


students


designated


as high,


moderate,


and low











means


of the high


moderate,


and low


apprehensive


students


with


their


respect


achievement


scores


in writing


are compared


apprehension,

writers. In


the highest


achievement


scores


indicate


the highest


the most


scores


indica


confident

te the best


writers


TABLE


Pre-


Postapprehension


and Achievement


Means


High
Apprehensi


Source


rate


ves


Appr


ehensives


Apprehens ives


Grade


Preapprehension
Preachievement

Postapprehension
Postachievement


62.417
20.722

86.333
20.722


86.280
23.753


113.769
31.257


94.160
25.681


.308


30.179


Grade


Preapprehension
Preachievement

Postapprehension
Postachievement


59.461
23.000

69.615
21.233


89.711
24.224


91.654
22.853


113.071
25.476


111.571
24.118


Grade


Preapprehension
Preachievement

Postapprehension
Pos achievement


52.091
24.607

61.818
24.666


80.295
28.273


85.295
27.364


105.417
31.581


106.750


.000


Examination


of Table


warrants


these findings


Students who











are moderately


apprehensive


tend


to write


less


skillfully


than


those


students


are confident


in their writing


skills.


Summary


Tables


the analysis


of the data generated by


subjects


each


of the three


grade


levels


were


presented


in Chapter


summary


of findings


grade


level


is presented


in Table


4-11.


TABLE


4-11


Summary


of Findings


Grade


Level


Grade Group Measure Significance


6 C Postwriting Apprehension not significant
6 C Postwriting Achievement not significant
6 Exi Postwriting Apprehension not significant
6 ExI Postwriting Achievement not significant
6 Ex2 Postwriting Apprehension not significant
6 Ex2 Postwriting Achievement not significant

7 C Postwriting Apprehension not significant
7 C Postwriting Achievement not significant
7 Exi Postwriting Apprehension significant *
7 ExI Postwriting Achievement not significant
7 Ex2 Postwriting Apprehension not significant
7 Ex2 Postwriting Achievement not significant

8 C Postwriting Apprehension not significant
8 C Postwriting Achievement not significant
8 Exi Postwriting Apprehension not significant
8 Exi Postwriting Achievement not significant
8 Ex2 Postwriting Apprehension not significant
8 Ex2 Postwriting Achievement not significant


The relationship


of the findings


to the hypotheses


grade


level


is summarized


in Table


4-12.