Article+Summaries+Spring+2010

**__ Field Study Research - Reading and Responding to Data Sources __** March 16, 2010 ** USING WIKI-BASED PEER-CORRECTION TO DEVELOP WRITING SKILLS OF BRAZILIAN EFL LEARNERS ** After much searching, I was able to come up with an article that relates to my study. Although this researcher was working with EFL students in Brazil, the premise of his research is the same as mine. He wanted to discover whether or not students writing would improve using collaborative online tools such as Wikis. The students submitted their compositions online then peers read and edited them. Franco found that not only did his students improve their writing skills, but their motivation for writing in general increased. Furthermore, an added bonus was that the students developed social skills because they needed to cooperate, support and enhance one another’s creativity. It was very gratifying to read this article because the researcher incorporated many aspects into his study that are similar to my own. For instance, he began with a survey that asked the students questions such as: 1. How do you feel about writing? 2. When it comes to writing, which option do you prefer? 3. What's the best thing about using a wiki? 4. Is it time-consuming working with wikis? 5. How do you post on the wiki? 6. How do you feel about correction on the wiki? 7. If you don't like using the wiki, why do you prefer paper? 8. Do you use the Internet (such as online dictionaries, Google, translators) to help you write? The questions I asked were: 1.) Where do you enjoy writing the most?  2.)  What method to you prefer, paper and pencil or composing on the computer? 3.) What if anything distracts you about the computer lab?  4.)  Are you okay with other students peer editing your work? 5.) Do you know the proper typing conventions?  One of my sub-questions was motivation of students with regard to writing and submitting their work. This was also a very important part of Franco’s study. He found the motivation increased quite significantly through online writing and editing. “ As a teacher, I had a very positive feedback from my students in terms of level of motivation and interest. The students who used to produce well-written compositions on paper also succeeded when they posted writings on the wiki. What is more, the students with poorly developed writing skills were more aware of their mistakes because of peer-correction.” (p.55)   Another outcome that he found beneficial for the learners was that “(they) become less dependent of the teacher and share responsibility with their peers. (sic) In this digital context, they gain higher degrees of autonomy in the sense that they have to make choices while writing and providing feedback to their peers by trying out new ways of involving with the writing process.” (p.55) My hope is that after one more ‘free write’, my class will become very independent. The writing and self editing will come more freely and the peer editing will be done without need for instruction. Overall, the students will become more responsible for their own learning. **__ Field Study Research - Reading and Responding to Data Sources __** March 23, 2010 Siew, Koh Teck. “How Does Peer Editing Improve Students’ Quality of Writing.” Paper presented at the National Institute of Education, Singapore Conference. 2009. This article was written by the principal of an English language school in Singapore. She wanted to find out how peer-editing improved student’s quality of writing. The sub-questions for the study were: i. How does a teacher’s preparation help in making the peer-editing process more effective? ii. What do students (both writers and editors) really learn from the process of cooperative learning which took the form of peer-editing? Iii. How can we track improvement in writing ability? The study was carried out on 32 secondary students at a private Anglican school over eight class periods. Qualitative data collection techniques were used such as student interviews, observations, reflection and surveys. It was concluded that indeed peer-editing does indeed improve overall writing skills. These conclusions came about through the writing samples, surveys and questioning the students. Overall, it was discovered that students benefited most from sharing ideas and having discussions on ways to improve writing. One of the side notes was that the conversations helped students to get a better sense of writing for an audience. Finally, Siew noted that for the process to be effective, teachers need to prepare their students well to be effective peer-editors. They can do this through offering guides such as: scaffolding, models, checklists, rubrics and developmental worksheets.) This article was a wonderful find. It incorporated many of the pedagogical concepts we have been talking about in class lately, such as social constructivism and multiple intelligences. The author quotes Vygotsky and Gardner and uses their theories to substantiate the benefits of peer editing using technology. Essentially, peer editing utilizes students’ abilities to interact with one another (interpersonal intelligence) and develop interpsychological processing as described by Vygotsky. Just when I was starting to wonder if peer editing was worthwhile, this article reaffirmed my belief in it. Nevertheless, students cannot just start to peer edit without any instruction. It is vital that there are a few things in place in order for peer editing to be successful. These include teachers preparing students well for the editing process and students being primed and cognitively ready for it. I tried to prepare the students for peer editing using technology by beginning with paper and pencil journal writing and peer editing. I gradually moved to composing and editing on the computer. I know I could have prepared the students even more, however, by giving them mini-lessons on proofreading for mechanics and/or structure and/or content. Again, it was a matter being pressed for time and not wanting to overwhelm the students. I wanted to teach them about free writes and not bombard them with too much information. In hindsight, I did them a disservice by not giving the tools necessary for effective editing. I will definitely heed the suggestion to provide a peer editing checklist for reference when editing each other’s work. The other interesting piece of information that stood out for me when reading this article is that part of the cooperative learning task of peer editing is having conversations with one another about their pieces of writing. I did the opposite of this. I had the students do their free writes in silence so everyone could concentrate. When it came time to edit, there were a few conversations, but they mostly revolved around how to attach articles to their Assignment Page on the Sharepoint Inbox. Again, this is information that will be vital to improving the peer editing process in the future. **__ Field Study Research - Reading and Responding to Data Sources __** March 30, 2010 This article is written by two high school English teachers who wanted to improve the way students were editing and then submitting their work for marking. Although they had been asking their students to submit electronic versions of their essays and other assignments for comments and suggestions, they wanted to refine the process. They also wanted to put more of the responsibility on the students to peer edit each other’s work. They discovered that Word has a “Reviewing Toolbar” that allows one to give line per line feedback on an essay. Initially, it took several classes to teach the process of editing and have the students get used to the new tool. However, once they were comfortable with it and were using it properly, it was well worth it. The students improved the way in which they commented on their peer’s papers and the writers were able to keep the draft revisions and comments. Furthermore, all of these drafts and revisions could be put into a portfolio to be handed in and discussed with instructors. The hope is that “by tracking comments through a series of revisions, students will be able to identify personal strengths and weaknesses not only in writing but also in peer editing.” Thus, students can focus more energy on the areas in their writing that need work, such as content, organization, mechanics or usage. Furthermore, they will also be able to identify an area of expertise and students can go to these students for specific help with their writing. When I first read this article I was excited and frustrated at the same time. It sounded so perfect. Why didn’t I use this tool for my field study! Maybe I still could. After all there is still time left to change my direction for the rest of the term.... When I calmed down a bit, I went into Word 2007 and tried the Reviewing Toolbar. It was very handy that the authors had included the “Using Technology to Peer Edit” handout in their article. This is the same handout that was given to their students in order to teach them the basics of the editing tool. Although the information was meant for Word 2000, I was able to adapt for Word 2007. Perry wasn’t kidding when she said that it would take several hours to prepare the initial demonstration. Heck, it took me long enough to figure it out. I know my class and they would tune out too quickly. Yet, the thought of having the students critically evaluate each other`s work was so appealing. I could go from comments like: “Nice commas” to “Your use of powerful descriptors allows me to picture the lake.” Aaaah wouldn’t that be nice. Not only would it make the students more accountable for their revisions, but it would free me up from editing and marking. I could focus my efforts on assisting students one to one with improving their writing skills. Another great advantage of this program is that students are able to save the document with the comments and the changes highlighted so they can show the teacher or track their growth in the writing and editing process. They can place all these edited pieces in a portfolio to look back on and see trends or improvements. Although it is appealing to try this out with the class, I know it isn’t realistic at this point. Instead, what I have decided to do is have the students submit both the first draft and the peer edited version of their writing as attachments in the Sharepoint In Box on my webpage. I’ve asked the editors to highlight the changes in red so I will be able to see them. They also need to write a thoughtful “sandwich” comment that gives the writer a compliment and some helpful advice for further revisions. Perhaps at some point, I will take the students into the lab and try it out. Who knows, maybe they will be faster at picking it up than I think. **__ Field Study Research - Reading and Responding to Data Sources __** April 7, 2010
 * __ Research Article Summaries __**
 * Claudio de Paiva FRANCO, ** Novitas-ROYAL, 2008, Vol.: 2 (1), 49-59. ISSN: 1307-4733
 * __ Article Summary __**
 * __ Comments on the article __**
 * Perry, Debbie, Smithmier, Mike. Peer Editing With Technology: Using the Computer to Create Interactive Feedback. English Journal. Vol. 94, No. 6. July 2005. **
 * Stemper, Julie. Enhancing Student Revising and Editing Skills through Writing Conferences and Peer Editing. Master of Arts Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University and SkyLight Professional Development Field-Based Master's Program. May 2005; 87 pp. **

__ Summary __
This paper focused on the methods of teaching students the most productive ways of revising their pieces of creative writing. It also addressed the need to give students a rationale for editing and the necessity of honing this skill to be used throughout their educational career. The subjects were grade six students at a middle school in the United States. The researcher based her results on a longitudinal study in which she gathered writing samples twice throughout the year and analyzed improvement in revising and editing skills in the areas of content and mechanics. Overall, the results were positive. Stemper saw improvements in self and peer editing and in the attitude toward revising and editing. She credits this improvement primarily to the way in which the teachers at the middle school approached the whole task of writing. They began with creating a positive environment, and then offered mini-lessons in the writing craft. Next, the teachers modelled the writing processes, before having the students set out on their own. Finally, they taught the students to be peer editors and spent time in teacher/student conferences to give one to one guidance and support. This paper focuses on the benefits of the latter two steps in the writing process.

__ My Response __
I found this article eye opening. Why didn’t someone tell me this sooner! I mean I know there are teachers who never edit their students’ work, but I just thought it was laziness on their part. I always got my work edited when I was a student and by doing so, I thought I was helping my students. The researcher of this article is of the belief that we not only demoralize our students but quash their creative abilities by editing their work. She quotes other researchers in the area of writing and editing by saying, “The average English paper corrected by the average English teacher looks as though it has been trampled on with cleated boots and has the same effect on the student” (Lillios and Iding, 1996, p. 1). Furthermore, “teacher editing reduces student ownership in their writing. When students are unable to take ownership in their writing, the writing becomes the ‘teacher’s work’” (Willis, 1997). “Meanwhile, students are overwhelmed with too many comments on their papers and their positive feelings toward writing are greatly diminished” (Lillios and Iding, 1996). To add to this, students begin to feel anxiety about errors and rarely take chances in their writing” (Calkins, 1986). Wow, now I can see why students just look at the grade and disregard the rest. And all the time and effort I’ve spent on editing!!! She also goes on to say that this demoralizing attitude can cripple the students’ creativity. They develop low self-esteem and poor motivation. One student in particular comes to mind when I hear that. He typifies this description. It has been such a challenge for me to get him to write, but I know there is a writer in there dying to get out. I’ve tried all sorts of things, including forcing him to write. This, of course, failed miserably. He just stuck his heels in further, became more stubborn and refused to write. He’s got to want to write for himself; he needs to see some intrinsic value in it. The focus needs to be on his self-esteem first and then other things will fall into line. I love this quote, however depressing it is: School has lost its newness or has proven itself to be uninspiring; in any case, adolescents certainly don’t act as if they expect any fresh excitement from a day at the work farm. Many have become jaded and bored: good students will only work if they get paid in the coin of grades and poor students often won’t work whatever the pay. (Zeleman and Daniels, 1988) I have definitely come across students like this. I can’t make this a blanket statement for all the students in my class, but the ones that keep me awake at night fall into the category of bored and uninspired. In many cases, it is because of the larger social issues they are dealing with. Stemper believes that, in general, teachers have created this malaise. They “utilize poor evaluation procedures, poor instructional practices and inadequate environment where students are unable to discuss their writing” (2002). Teachers, like me, are shocked at what little effort students put into revising and editing. Yet, according to many researchers, it is only natural that we get either poor editing or a ‘virtual photocopy’ of the first draft because we don’t put the time and effort into teaching revision properly. There is hope, however. Stemper believes in constructivist pedagogy and that children must learn by doing. She involves the students in writer’s workshops where there is freedom for students to share ideas with one another, give individual feedback on writing and choice as to the writing topic. I think these fundamentals of writing more than anything else is what I will take away from this article. Furthermore, to take time to teach editing skills in context by using real examples of student’s writing. I can’t say that I was completely off target on this. I guess my next stage is to go back to the classroom and re-teach the editing process step by step. I need to make clear what it is I am looking for with the editing and not leave it to chance that they will pick up the sentence structure, paragraph writing and content and mechanical errors. Although I commented on each person’s submission through the evaluation tool on the Sharepoint Inbox, I could also give personal feedback as well. By thinking through all the stages of writing and keeping my learners needs in mind, I am setting up the writing assignment for success.