Journal of Teacher Action Research 1 JTAR · 2019-04-12 · Through this action research project, I...

JournalofTeacherActionResearch1

JournalofTeacherActionResearch-Volume5,Issue2,2019,practicalteacherresearch.com,ISSN#2332-2233

©JTAR.AllRightsReserved

JTAR EDITORS

JTAR JournalofTeacherActionResearchVolume5,Issue2,2019

ProceduralChecklistInterventiontoIncreaseMathAssignmentCompletion 4AmongStudentswithHighIncidenceDisabilitiesMartinRiosCalliLewisChiu

ParallelConferencing:Co-ViewingAndCo-AssessingTeacherCandidates’Videos 22StephanieKotch-Jester ElizabethSoslau VickiGoettel BridgetDudaNicholasBellDeirdreLillyReflections:ExploringStudentWritingSelf-EfficacyIntheOnlineEnvironment 39SharonicaNelsonEngagingEducationMajorsToEmbraceDiversityThroughExpressiveArts 56AnnetteMohanGraceJepkemboiReshapingPractice:AnActionResearchProjectExploringWritingInstruction 77KateRollMargaretVaughnWritinginMathematicstoIncreaseStudentUnderstanding 95AshleyHarlanPerceptionsofFlexibleSeating 120MaryEllenSorrell

JTAR AbouttheJournal

Foundedin2013,theJournalofTeacherActionResearch(ISSN:2332-2233)isapeer-reviewedonlinejournalindexedwithEBSCOthatseekspracticalresearchthatcanbeimplementedinPre-Kindergarten

throughPost-Secondaryclassrooms.Theprimaryfunctionofthisjournalistoprovideclassroomteachersandresearchersameansforsharingclassroompractices.

Thejournalacceptsarticlesforpeer-reviewthatdescribeclassroompracticewhichpositivelyimpactsstudentlearning.Wedefineteacheractionresearchasteachers(atalllevels)studyingtheirpracticeand/ortheirstudents'learninginamethodicalwayinordertoinformclassroompractice.Articlessubmittedtothejournalshoulddemonstrateanactionresearchfocuswithintenttoimprovethe

author’spractice.

EditorialTeam

Co-EditorsGilbertNaizer,Ph.D. AprilSanders,Ph.D.

TexasA&MUniversity-Commerce SpringHillCollege

AssociateEditorsLauraIsbell,Ph.D. TamiMorton,Ph.D. SusanWilliams

TexasA&MUniversity-Commerce TexasA&MUniversity-CommerceTexasA&MUniversity-Commerce

ProductionEditorandWebmasterChaseYoung,Ph.D.

SamHoustonStateUniversity

www.practicalteacherresearch.com

THEJOURNALOFTEACHERACTIONRESEARCH 39

JournalofTeacherActionResearch- Volume5,Issue2,2019,<practicalteacherresearch.com>,ISSN#2332-2233©JTAR.AllRights

REFLECTIONS:EXPLORINGSTUDENTWRITINGSELF-EFFICACYINTHEONLINEENVIRONMENTSharonicaNelson

UniversityofAlabamaatBirmingham

AlabamaA&MUniversity

AbstractManystudieshavebeenconductedthataddresswritingself-efficacy;however,fewstudiesaddresswritingself-efficacyintheonlineenvironment.ThroughthisactionresearchendeavorIsoughttounderstandwhetherstudentonlinewritingself-efficacychangedfromthebeginningofthecoursetotheendwithintentional,targetedassignments:authentic,informal,andformalwriting.StudentswereadministeredtheSEWSinstrumentandwereaskedtocompleteitanonymouslyatthebeginningofthecourseandattheend.Datawascalculatedforpercentageofchangeforeachaspectoftheinstrument.Resultsshowedthatpositivechangesinstudentwritingself-efficacycanoccuroverthecourseofasemester.

Keywords:teacheractionresearch,onlinelearning,self-efficacy,writing,highereducation,historicallyblackcollegesanduniversities,teacherreflection

Introduction

Onlineeducationenrollmenthasincreasedexponentiallywithinthelastdecade.Vilkas&McCabe(2014)suggestthatinnovativepracticesareneededtoimprovequalityinstruction,andthatoneareathatneedsfurtherresearchispromotingonlinestudents’self-efficacy.Inmycurrentpractices,Ihavelearnedthatmanystudentswhoenteronlinecollegewritingcoursesdosooutofnecessityandnotoutofpersonaldesire.Ihavefurtherlearnedthat,manystudentsdonothavehighself-efficacypertainingtowriting,coupledwiththefactthatmanyofthemarereallynotcomfortabletakingonlinecourses.Theymayhaveenrolledbecauseitwaslistednextinthesequenceofcoursestheyneedtotake,theydecidedtotakethecourseasalast-ditchefforttograduate,orthetraditionalofferingofthecoursewasfull,sotheyoptedfortheonlineversion.Whateverthecase,manystudentsareintheonlinecourseandhavelowself-efficacyregardingthewritingprocessesintheonlineenvironment.



Throughthisactionresearchproject,Isoughttounderstandstudentwritingself-efficacyintheonlineenvironmentwithinawritingintensiveliteraturecourse,with45studentsinahistoricallyBlackcollegeintheSoutheastUnitedStates.ThefirstsemesterItaughtthecourse,Inoticedthatseveralstudentswithdrewfromthecourse,failedthecourse,andmanybarelypassedduetoneglectingtocompletemanyofthewritingassignments.Thereweremanystudentswhopassed,butthenumberofstrugglingstudentswasalarming.Thisledmetoreflectonthetypesofwritingassignments,therequiredelementsoftheassignments,andthegradingoftheassignments.Afterreflecting,themainthingIdecidedtoemployforthenextsemesterwastoincorporateablendofauthentic,informal,andformalwriting.WhileItailoredthewritingassignments,Ialsofounditbeneficialtotrackstudentwritingself-efficacyasthiscouldhavebeenacontributingfactortoeitherstudentcompletionofwritingassignmentsintheprevioussemester.Thisreflectiveactionresearchstudydetailstheprocessesofseekingtoimprovethecoursewhiletrackingstudentwritingself-efficacyforchangeasaresultofthoseimprovements.

ReflectiononPractice.“Incommon-senseterms,reflectionliessomewherearoundthenotionoflearning.Wereflectonsomethinginordertoconsideritinmoredetail”(Moon,2001,p.1).Withthisinmind,Ithoughtitnecessarytolearnfrommyexperiencesofteachingthecoursetoimproveitformyfuturestudents.ItisthroughreflectionthatIwasabletoascertainpointsofcorrection,development,andimprovement.Rogers(2001)placedthefocusofreflectiononthelearners’professionalgrowth.Idecidedthatreflectiononthiscoursewasimportantplaceformyprofessionalgrowth.Uponrealizingthatmanyofmystudentswerelargelyunsuccessfulinthecourse,Idecidedthatitwasmoreimportanttomethatstudentsweresuccessfulandthattheylearnedpertinentwritingskillsthatwouldimpacttheirwritingself-efficacy.Therefore,Iconstitutednon-negotiablestandardsasimprovementsforthecourse.Idecidedthatstudentswouldparticipateinauthenticwriting,formal,andinformalassignmentstailoredforthisonlinecourse,whicharedescribedinthefollowingsections.

AuthenticWritingAssignments.Authenticwritingiswritingthatcausesstudentstomovebeyondtheirpriorknowledge(Kixmiller,2004).Studentswererequiredtocompleteacriticalessayinwhichtheyweretocriticallyanalyzeatext,researchandsynthesizecriticalsources,citetextualevidence,adheretogrammaticalstandardsofEnglish,andemployconventionsofwriting.Thisassignmentrequiredstudentstomovebeyondtheirpriorknowledge,whilereadingliterature,thinkingcriticallyaboutit,usingModernLanguageAssociation(MLA)format,andusingarubrictoadheretoassignmentparameters.

FormalandInformalWritingAssignments.Studentswerealsorequiredtocompleteformalandinformalwritingthroughoutthedurationofthecourse.IneachofthesetypesofassignmentsstudentswererequiredtoadheretoconventionsofStandardEnglish,refrainfromgrammaticalerrors,anduseMLAformat.Formalwritingassignmentsincludedapoetryexplicationassignment.Forthisassignment,studentsweretoreadtheassignedpoetryandwriteananalysis.Theanalysisincludeddiscussionofliteraryelements,



explanationofthestructureofthepoem,andcomparisonandcontrasttootherchosenpoemsandliteratureassignedinthecourse.Arubricwasprovidedthatoutlinedtheassignmentparameters.

Severalcriticalparagraphswereassignedwherestudentswroteabriefcriticaloverviewoftheassignedliteratureandcitetextualevidence.Arubricwasprovidedfortheseshortassignments.Lastly,aformalassignmentintheformofavirtual,oralpresentationwasassigned.Arubricwasalsoprovidedforthisassignment.StudentsweretocreateanoralpresentationthatdetailedthelifeandworksofoneliteraryfigureofaspecifictimeperiodstudiedwithinWorldLiterature204,suchasTheAgeofReasonorTheRomanticPeriod.

Studentsweretoessentiallyresearchandexplainhowthechosenauthor’sworkwasrepresentativeoftheperiodandtheliteraryimpactoftheauthor’slegacy.StudentsthencreatedascreenrecordingofpresentationsoftheirresearchanduploadedittoYouTubeforviewingandgrading.

Discussionpostswereconsideredinformalassignments.Studentsreadtheassignedliterarytextsandrespondedtothetextsthroughinstructorcreatedpromptsoftheirchoice.Thesewereassignedbi-weekly.Studentswroteasubstantialamountontheliterarypiece,respondtotwootherclassmatesinamannerthatmovedthepostforward,anddiscusstheiropinionwhileprovidingtextualevidence.Ihopedthatthroughthecompletionofthesewritingintenseassignmentsandtheimplementationofrubricsthatstudentswritingself-efficacywouldbepositivelyimpactedinthisonlinecourse.

LiteratureReview

Self-EfficacyandWriting.Muchresearchhasbeendoneconcerningself-efficacy.Researchonself-efficacystartedinthe1970s.Yet,thisliteraturereviewwillnotattempttodiscussallresearchinthearea;however,itwillpresentthosestudiesmostcloselyrelatedtoself-efficacyconcerningwritingandonlinecourses.Tobegin,Bandura(1986,p.391)definedself-efficacyas“people’sjudgmentsoftheircapabilitiestoorganizeandexecutecoursesofactionrequiredtoattaindesignatedtypesofperformances.”Inotherwords,self-efficacyisone’sconfidenceinhisorherabilities.Therefore,self-efficacyandlearningiscritical(Hodges,2008).Whenpeoplebelieveintheirabilitytoexecutesomething,theytendtothinkpositivelyaboutdoingso.Consequently,“peoplewhohavestrongbeliefsintheircapabilitiesapproachdifficulttasksaschallengestobemasteredratherthanasthreatstobeavoided”(Bandura,1997,p.39).

Thisconceptappliestowriting.Inastudyconcerningwritingandself-efficacy,Klassen(2002)concludedthatstudentperceivedself-efficacywasoneofthestrongestpredictorsofwritingcompetence.Whenstudentsareconfidentinthemselvesaswriters,theytendtobemorecompetentwriters.Inastudytoexaminehowwritingself-efficacychangedovertime,Webb,Vandiver,andJeung(2016)foundthatstudentwritingself-efficacyaffectedthefinalcoursegradeinmiddleandhighschool.Theyalsonotedthatstudentsreportedahigherlevelofconfidenceintheirwritingattheendofawritingintensivecourse.Jalaluddin,Paramasivam,Husain,andBakar(2015)arguedthatwritingisnotaneasytaskasitisahighlycomplexanddemandingtaskthatrequiresanumberofskillstobeperformed.The



authorsnotedthatwritingperformanceisdependentonwritingabilityperception.Studentswhoarenotveryconfidentintheirwritingmaynotfeelthattheypossessthenecessaryskillstowritesuccessfully.

OnlineWritingSelf-Efficacy.Bruningetal.(2013)statedthatwritingself-efficacydiffersbytypeofwritingandwritingcontext.Studentwritingself-efficacydiffersintheonlineenvironmentbecauseitisanonlinecontextinsteadoftheface-to-facecontext.Muchresearchhasbeenperformedononlinelearning;however,verylittlehasbeenconductedonstudentwritingself-efficacyinthedistancelearningstyle.Nevertheless,Kuo,Walker,Schroder,&Belland(2014)offeredthatonlinecoursesdifferconsiderablyfromtraditionalinstructioninthewaystudentsinteractwiththeinstructor.Studentscannotreadilyaccesstheinstructorandthereforemustself-guidetheirlearningofmuchofthematerialincludingwritingassignments.

Kuoetal.(2014)addedthatonlinelearningrequiresthatstudentsbeconfidentinperforminginternet-relatedactionsandbewillingtoself-managetheirlearningprocess.WhenstudentshavelowInternetself-efficacyjoinedwithlowwritingself-efficacy,itcouldbedetrimentaltothestudents’success.Inastudyconcerningwritinginacomputer-basedcourse,ParkandCho(2014)foundthatonlinewriterswhoregularlytookonlinecoursestendtohavehigherself-efficacyandaremorelikelytoincorporatefeedbackthannon-onlinewriters.Further,Shen,Cho,Tsai&Marra(2013)proposedthatstudents’self-judgmentabouttheircapabilitiesiscriticalfortheirsatisfactionwithanonlinecourse.Additionally,Ergul(2004)showedthatself-efficacyindistanceeducationsignificantlyandpositivelypredictedstudents'academicachievement.Therefore,positiveself-efficacyconcerningwritingandonlinelearningisvitaltostudentsuccess.

Methodology

Participants.Participantswerestudentsfromdifferentprogramsofstudyrangingfromsophomorestograduatingseniors.Thiswritingintenseliteraturecoursehad45studentsenrolled.Therewere27femalestudents,and18weremalestudents.Thecourseisapartofthecorecurriculumwithstudentsfromseveralmajorsenrolled.Studentsalsohadvaryinglineagesofwritingandonlinecourseexperience.

Instrumentation.Thepurposeofthisstudywastoexaminewhetheronline,collegestudentswouldhaveachangeinwritingself-efficacy.Theresearchquestionwas:Doesthelevelofstudentwritingself-efficacychangefromthebeginningofanonlinecoursetotheendofthecourse?Toanswerthisquestion,Iemployedoneinstrument.TheSelf-EfficacyforWritingScale(SEWS)consistsof16itemscorrespondingtothreecategoriesofwritingrelatedexperience:ideation,conventions,andself-regulation(Bruningetal.,2013).

Thestudyincluded15oftheSEWSquestions.ThelastquestionoftheSEWSinstrumentwasomittedtoavoidstudentsurveyfatigueduetoquestionrepetitionandtoremainconsistentwithcalculatingscoresforfivequestionsforeachaspectoftheSEWSinstrument.Theinstrumentconsistsof5-pointLikertstylequestionswherestudentsprovidedthedegreeof



agreementordisagreementtoquestionssuchas:IcanputmyideasintowritingandIcanavoiddistractionswhileIwrite.TheSEWSprovidesinformationaboutself-efficacyinidentifiabledimensionsofthewritingprocess;however,itdoesnotqueryself-efficacyforperformanceonwritingassessmentsoranyotherspecificwritingtaskorgenre.Ithasbeenvalidatedandfoundreliable(Bruningetal.,2013).Although,theSEWSinstrumentwasinitiallyestablishedforusewithadvancedandAPlevelhighschoolstudents,Ifounditsuitableforusewithinmylowerlevelwritingintensecoreliteraturecourse,asmoststudentsweresophomores.Inaddition,Ramos-Villagrasaetal.(2018),validatedtheinstrumentsforusewithcollegestudents.

Procedures.AllstudentswhowereregisteredinthecoursewereaskedtocompletethesurveyviaBlackboard(Bb)surveythefirstdayofthecourse.Thesurveywascomposedof15questionsfromSEWS,and45studentscompletedthesurveyanonymously.Studentstookthequestionnairepriortocompletingorbeingexposedtoanycourseassignments.Studentswerenotcoercedinanywaytoparticipateinthesurvey.

AttheendofthecoursestudentswereaskedtocompletethesamesurveyviaBbsurvey.Thesurveywascomposedof15questionsfromSEWS.Duetostudentattrition,42studentscompletedthesurveyanonymously.Studentscompletedthissurveyafterallothercourseassignmentswerecompletedandwerenotcoercedinanywaytoparticipateinthesurvey.Iobtainedresultsfromboththepre-coursesurveyandthepostcoursesurveyfromtheBbsurveytoolandcalculatedbyhandtoobtainthepercentagesnecessarytodocumentanychangeswithinthefirstandsecondwritingself-efficacysurveydata.

Setting.Thesettingforthisstudywasahistorically,predominatelyBlackuniversityintheSoutheasternUnitedStateswithanenrollmentof5,000students.AdmissionrequirementsareACTandSATscores.Theuniversityoffersdegreesinengineering,humanities,communications,Master’sleveldegrees,anddoctoraldegreesinelementaryeducation.

Results

Theresultsforeachaspectoftheinstrumentwereassessedandcalculatedforpercentages(aslabeledaspectswithintheSEWSinstrument).Asareminder,thethreeareasassessedbytheinstrumentareconventions,self-regulation,andwritingideation.First,Ireviewedeachofthefifteenquestionsandascertainedthechangesfromthebeginningofthesemestertoendofthesemester.Ithoughtitwouldbebeneficialtoexplaintheresultsinthecontextoftheaspectsmeasuredbytheinstrumentandforeaseofcomparison.Itmustalsobenotedthatthestronglyagreeandagreeanddisagreeandstronglydisagreewerepercentagescombinedinthenarrativeforeachsection.

Ideation.Ideationisconcernedwithstudents’self-efficacyingeneratingideasfortheirwriting.Bruningetal.(2013)arguedthatwritingcannottakeplacewithoutideas.Therefore,itisimportantthatstudentsfeelconfidentinthisarea.Questions1-5wererelatedtothis



aspectoftheSEWSinstrument.Thepercentagesofchangefrompre-coursetopost-coursearedepictedinthetablesandnarrativesbelow.

Question1-Icanthinkofideasformywriting.Thenumberofstudentswhoagreedthattheycouldthinkofideasfortheirwritingincreasedto92%postcourse(seeTable1).Inthebeginning,83%ofstudentsagreedthattheycouldthinkofideasfortheirwriting.Thiswasasmallincreaseof9%with7%ofstudentsasneutral.Therewere10%ofstudentsneutralinthebeginning,and8%disagreed.Thiswasa2%decreaseindisagreement.

Table1:Question1Results

RESPONSE PRE-COURSE POST-COURSE CHANGE

STRONGLYAGREE 35 42 7

AGREE 48 50 2

NEITHER 7 0 7

DISAGREE 7 4 3

STRONGLYDISAGREE 3 4 1

Question2-Icanputmyideasintowriting.Morestudentsagreedinthesecondsurveythattheycouldputtheirideasintowriting(seeTable2).Inthebeginning,only77%ofstudentsagreedthattheycouldputtheirideasintowriting.Attheendofthecourse96%ofstudentsthoughtthattheycoulddothis.Thisisa19%increasefromthebeginningtotheendofthesemesterofstudentswhofeltthattheirself-efficacyincreasedinthisarea.Nostudentsdisagreed.Therewasa13%decreaseinthosewhowereneutral.6%ofstudentdisagreedinthebeginning.However,nostudentsdisagreedforthesecondsurvey.




AGREE 45 54 9

NEITHER 17 4 8

DISAGREE 3 0 3




Question3-Icanthinkofmanywordstodescribemyideas.Thereweremorestudentswhofeltthattheycouldthinkofwordstodescribetheirideasbeforethecoursestartedhencethe5%percentdecrease(seeTable3).Therewerealsostudentswhofeltthattheyneitheragreedordisagreedpostcourse.Forthesecondsurvey,6%morestudentswereneutral.Only1%lessstudentsdisagreed.




AGREE 42 46 4

NEITHER 13 19 6

DISAGREE 13 8 5


Question4-Icanthinkofalotoforiginalideas.Manystudentsagreedthattheycouldthinkofalotoforiginalideasinthebeginning(seeTable4).However,5%moreofstudentsagreedthattheycoulddosopostcourse,henceasmallincrease.Only7%ofstudentswereneutralinthesecondsurvey.Therewere4%ofstudentsdisagreedinthisarea.Thisis12%lessthanthosewhodisagreedinthefirstsurvey.




AGREE 61 58 3

NEITHER 13 7 6

DISAGREE 3 0 3


Question5-Iknowexactlywheretoputmyideasinmywriting.Therewere11%moreofstudentswhoagreedpostcoursethattheyknewwheretoputtheirideasinwriting(seeTable5).Therewere69%ofstudentswhoagreedpostcoursethattheyfelttheyknewwheretoputtheirideas.8%moreofstudentswereneutralpostcourse.Only4%ofstudentsdisagreedpostcourse.Thisisan18%decreaseinthosewhodisagreed.






AGREE 48 50 2

NEITHER 19 27 8

DISAGREE 19 4 15


Conventions.Bruningetal.(2013)statedthattheseconddimensionofthemodelisself-efficacyforwritingconventions,whichrefertoasetofgenerallyacceptedstandardsforexpressingideaswhenwritinginagivenlanguage.InEnglishthesewouldincludeagreed-uponwaystospell,punctuate,capitalize,andstructuresentences.Questions6-10wererelatedtothisaspectoftheSEWSinstrument.Thepercentagesofchangefrompre-coursetopostcoursearedepictedinthetablesandnarrativesbelow.

Question6-Icanspellmywordscorrectly.Manystudentsstronglyagreedthattheycouldspellwordscorrectlypre-course,at84%(seeTable6).However,postcourse,3%moreofstudentsagreedthattheycouldspellwordscorrectly,at87%postcourse.Nostudentswereneutralpostcourse.Therewere14%ofstudentswhodisagreedtothisstatementpostcourse.




AGREE 42 58 16

NEITHER 8 0 8

DISAGREE 8 7 1


Question7-Icanwritecompletesentences.Moststudentsagreedthattheycouldwriteincompletesentencespreandpostcourse,andtherewasonlya1%increase(seeTable7).2%moreofstudentswereneutralpostcourse.Only4%ofstudentsdisagreedpostcourse,whichwas2%lessthanstudentswhodisagreedpre-course.






AGREE 52 50 2

NEITHER 13 15 2

DISAGREE 0 4 4


Question8-Icanpunctuatemysentencescorrectly.Moststudentsagreedthattheycouldpunctuatesentencescorrectlyduringthepreandpostcoursesurvey(seeTable8).87%ofstudentsagreedthattheydothispre-course.Therewere93%whoagreedpostcourse.Therewasa6%increaseinstudentswhofelttheycouldpunctuatesentencescorrectly.Therewasa3%decreaseinthosewhowereneutral.Only6%lessstudentsdisagreed.




AGREE 55 62 7

NEITHER 10 8 2

DISAGREE 3 0 3


Question9-Icanwritegrammaticallycorrectsentences.87%ofstudentsstronglyagreedoragreethattheycouldwritegrammaticallycorrectsentencespre-courseand93%agreedpostcourse(seeTable9).However,9%morestudentsagreedpostcoursethanpre-coursethattheycouldwritegrammaticallycorrectsentences.Therewasa1%decreaseinstudentswhowereneutral.Eventhough9%ofstudentsdisagreedthattheycouldwritegrammaticallycorrectsentencesinthebeginning,postcoursenostudentsdisagreed.






AGREE 52 50 2

NEITHER 13 12 1

DISAGREE 6 0 6


Question10-Icanbeginmyparagraphsintherightspot.Therewere75%ofstudentsagreedthattheycouldbegintheirparagraphsintherightspotpre-course,and81%postcourseagree(seeTable10).Thiswasa6%increase.Nostudentsstronglydisagreedpostcourse.10%disagreedpre-courseandonly4%disagreedpostcourse.Thiswasa6%decrease.Therewasa2%increaseinstudentswereneutral.




AGREE 52 50 3

NEITHER 13 15 2

DISAGREE 10 4 6


Self-Regulation.Self-regulationisanimportantaspectofwriting.Itisgoodforstudentstobeabletogenerateideasandhavingconfidenceintheirabilitiestogenerateideas.However,thesefactorscanbeuselessifstudentsarenotconfidentintheirabilitiestoregulatethemselveswhilewriting.Self-regulatoryskillsareneedednotonlytogenerateproductiveideasandwritingstrategiesbutalsotomanagetheanxietiesandemotionsthatcanaccompanywriting(Bruningetal,2013).Questions11-15wererelatedtothisaspectoftheSEWSinstrument.Thepercentagesofchangefrompre-coursetopostcoursearedepictedinthetablesandnarrativesbelow.



Question11-Icanfocusonmywritingforatleastonehour.Therewere55%ofstudentswhoagreedpre-coursethattheycouldfocusontheirwritingforatleastonehour,and58%agreedpostcourse(seeTable11).Therewasanincreaseof3%ofstudents’self-efficacyinthisarea.However,12%moreofstudentswereneutralpostcourse.Finally,10%lessstudentsdisagreed.




AGREE 42 31 11

NEITHER 19 31 12

DISAGREE 19 12 7


Question12-IcanavoiddistractionswhileIwrite.Therewere48%ofstudentswhoagreedpre-courseand62%postcourseagreethattheycouldavoiddistractionswhiletheywrite(seeTable12).Thiswasa14%increase,and16%fewerstudentswereneutralpostcourse.Only4%morestudentsdisagreedpostcoursethattheycouldavoiddistractionswhiletheywrite.




AGREE 32 50 18

NEITHER 29 15 16

DISAGREE 16 15 1




Question13-Icanstartwritingassignmentsquickly.Therewere62%ofstudentagreedpre-coursethattheycouldstartwritingassignmentsquickly.Yet,61%agreedpostcourse(seeTable13).Therewasa1%decreaseconcerningthisquestion,althoughstudentsdidreportpositivelyinthisareapreandpostcourse.Therewasa5%decreaseinthosewhowereneutral.6%ofstudentsdisagreedpre-courseand12%disagreedthattheycouldstartwritingassignmentsquickly.Thiswasa6%increaseinstudentswhodisagreed.




AGREE 52 46 6

NEITHER 32 27 5

DISAGREE 3 12 9


Question14-IcancontrolmyfrustrationwhenIwrite.81%ofstudentsagreedthattheycouldcontroltheirfrustrationbothpreandpostcourse(seeTable14).Therewasnosignificantchangeinself-efficacyinthisarea.13%morestudentswereneutral.Therewasa13%decreaseinstudentswhodisagreedthattheycouldcontrolfrustrationwhiletheywrite.




AGREE 68 50 18

NEITHER 6 19 16

DISAGREE 10 0 10




Question15-IcanthinkofmywritinggoalsbeforeIwrite.Therewere64%ofstudentswhoagreedpre-coursethatthattheycouldthinkofwritinggoals,and77%postcourse(seeTable15).Overall,therewasa13%increaseinstudentswhoagreedbytheendofthecourse.Therewere16%lessstudentswhowereneutral.Therewasa2%increaseinstudentswhodisagreedthattheythinkofwritinggoalsbeforewriting.




AGREE 58 54 4

NEITHER 29 15 16

DISAGREE 3 8 5


Discussion

Overall,therewasanincreaseinstudentwritingself-efficacyintheonlineenvironmentfromthebeginningofthecoursetotheendofthecourse.StudentsmostlyagreedorstronglyagreedtothepromptsoftheSEWSinstrumentattheendcourseofcourse,whereasinthebeginningtheydisagreedmore.Thisindicatedthattheirwritingself-efficacywasloweratthestartofthecourse.Thegreatestamountofpositivechangewasforthefollowingaspects:ideationandself-regulation.Forexample,49%ofstudentsagreedthattheirwritingself-efficacyinideationwasimproved.Theincreasecouldbeattributedtothefactthatgeneratingideasforwritingwasaskillthatpresenteditselfthroughtheinformaldiscussionpostsandthein-depththinkingstudentsweresubjectedtothroughtheformalwritingassignments.Theseassignmentsencouragedstudentstoshareideasandpersonalconnectionswiththeliterature,whichaidedinthegenerationofideas.

Theaspectofself-regulationalsoyieldedmoderatechangesinstudentwritingself-efficacy.Yet31%ofstudentsagreedthattheirwritingself-efficacyincreased.Theincreasecouldbeattributedtothefactthatstudentsnaturallyhavetoshowmoreself-regulationwithinonlinelearningenvironments.Whencompletingthewritingassignments,theprofessorwasnotreadilyaccessibleforhelporguidance.Studentsreliedonrubricsandothermeansofself-guidance,self-help,andself-motivationforcompletingthewritingassignments.

Theaspectofconventionsyieldedthelowestincreaseinstudentswhoagreedthattheirwritingself-efficacyincreasedinthisarea.Therewere25%moreofstudentsagreedpostcourse.Thoughtheincreasewasrelativelysmall,theincreasecouldbeattributedtocertain



elementswithinthecourse.Igradedheavilyonconventionsandevenrequiredstudentstoreviseworkwhennecessary.Imentionedgrammaticalerrors,spellingerrors,andpunctuationerrorswhenmarkingassignments.Therefore,studentsreceivedmuchpracticeintheareaofconventions.Iwassurprisedthattheincreaseinself-efficacyinthisareawasnotmuchgreater.

Futureresearchcouldincludetheideasmentionedhere.Therelationshipbetweenageandwritingself-efficacyincollegestudentsshouldbestudied.Thiswouldprovideinsightintowhetherageplaysaroleinhowstudentsfeelaboutwriting,especiallyintheonlinewritingenvironment.Itisimportanttounderstandifthereisanagegroupthathashigherorlowerwritingself-efficacyintheonlineenvironmentorifthereisanagegap.Anotherideaforfutureresearchisthedifferencebetweenwritingself-efficacyintraditionalcoursesandonlinecoursesforcollegestudentsshouldbestudied.Itshouldbeascertainedwhetherstudentsfeelmoreconfidentwritinginthetraditionalcourseorintheonlinesetting.Studentsmayfeellikebetterwritersinoneortheother.

Limitations

Onelimitationwasthatnoqualitativedatawascollectedtogaugetheperceptionsofthestudents.Collectingthisdataviainterviewsorevenobservationscouldhavepotentiallyprovidedmoredepthinthisactionresearchproject.Thistypeofdatawouldhaveallowedformoreconcreteevidenceastowhatinfluencedthechangeinthequestionnaireresponsesandtheincreaseinstudentwritingself-efficacyfrombeginningtotheendofthecourse.However,mygoalwastoonlyascertainiftherewasadifferenceinstudentattitudeconcerningtheirwritingabilitiesintheonlineenvironmentwhilebeingexposedtodifferenttypesofwritingassignmentsincludingformal,informal,andauthentictoinformmyownpractices.

Conclusion

Conductingthisresearchenlightenedme.AsIcriticallyreflectonthisactionresearchstudy,IamawarethatIwaswithinmyrightasaneducationpractitionertoperformactionresearchasameansofimprovingmypractices(Pine,2009).Thisiswhatteachersdo:criticallyreflect,study,andmakeimprovementsforthebettermentandthesuccessofourstudents.Inthecomingsemesters,Iplantocontinueprovidingmystudentswithauthenticwritingassignments,formalandinformalassignments,allowingthemtomakeconnectionstotheliteraturewereadinthecoursewhilestillconsistentlyenforcingtherulesandguidelinesofMLAformattingandstandardEnglishbecausethestudentsoverallwritingself-efficacydidincreaseasaresultoftheseassignments.Viathedatacollectedthroughtheexperimentalpedagogydescribedinthisstudy,ultimately,Ibelievethateventhoughstudentsmayhavehadanaversiontowriting,werenottotallycomfortablewithwriting,andthatthisdiscomfortmayhavebeenheightenedinthee-learningsetting,studentsmustbechallengedandheldtothesamestandardsasthoseintraditionalwritingcourses.Thischallengemaybethefactorthatincreasedstudentwritingself-efficacy,whichcouldpositivelyimpacttherestoftheircollegecareerandeventheirlivesconcerningwriting.



AbouttheAuthor

SharonicaNelson,Ed.DiscurrentlyservingasVisitingAssistantProfessorofEnglish/LanguageArtsEducationintheDepartmentofCurriculumandInstructionattheUniversityofAlabamaatBirmingham(UAB),inBirminghamAlabama.SheisanadjunctatAlabamaA&MUniversity.ShealsoteachesClassroomManagement,YoungAdultLiterature,andWritingandSpeakingforTeachers.Sheistheco-directorofRedMountainWritingProject(theNationalWritingProjectsitehousedatUAB).Herpassionisteachingalllearners,butshepridesherselfonhavingmanyyearsofexperienceinthesecondaryclassroom.Herresearchinterestsincludewritingintheonlineenvironment,writinginstruction,urbaneducation,literacy,andteacherprofessionaldevelopment.Email:[email protected]



References

Bandura,A.(1986).Socialfoundationsofthought&action:Asocialcognitivetheory.NewJersey: Prentice-Hall.Bandura,A.(1997).Self-efficacy:Theexerciseofcontrol.NewYork:W.H.Freeman&Company.Bruning,R.,Dempsey,M.,Kauffman,D.,Zumbrunn,S.&McKim,C.(2013)Examiningdimensionsof self-efficacyforwriting.JournalofEducationalPsychology,105(1),25-38.Ergul,H.(2004).Relationshipbetweenstudentcharacteristicsandacademicachievementindistance

educationandapplicationonstudentsofAnadoluUniversity.TurkishOnlineJournalofDistanceEducation.5.81-90.

Hodges,C.B.(2008).Self-efficacyinthecontextofonlineenvironments:Areviewofliteraturefor anddirectionsforresearch.PerformanceImprovementQuarterly,20(3-4),7-25.Jalaluddin,I.,Paramasivam,S.,Husain,S.andBakar,A.R.(2015)Theconsistencybetweenwriting self-efficacyandwritingperformance.JournalofLanguageTeachingandResearch,6(3).pp. 545-552.Kixmiller,L.(2004).Standardswithoutsacrifice:Thecaseforauthenticwriting.TheEnglishJournal, 94(1),29-33.Klassen,R.(2002).Writinginearlyadolescence:Areviewoftheroleofself-efficacybeliefs. EducationalPsychologyReview,14,173-203.doi:10.1023/A:1014626805572Kuo,Y.,Walker,A.Schroder,K.,Belland,B.(2014).Interaction,Internet,self-efficacy,andself- regulatedlearningaspredictorsofstudentsatisfactioninonlineeducationcourses.Internet andHigherEducation,20(2014),35-50.Moon,J.(2001).PDPworkingpaper4reflectioninhighereducationlearning.Retrievedfrom: https://www.brandeis.edu/experientiallearning/currentpdfs/reflectioninhighered.pdfPark,C.,&Cho,S.(2014).TheeffectsofKoreanlearners'onlineexperiencesontheirEnglishwriting. TOJET: TheTurkishOnlineJournalofEducationalTechnology,13(3),202-208.Pine,G.J.(2009).Teacheractionresearch:Buildingknowledgedemocrats.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.Shen,D.,Moon-Heum,C.,Tsai,C.,Marra,R.(2013).Unpackingonlinelearningexperiences:Online learningself-efficacyandlearningsatisfaction.InternetandHigherEducation,19(2013),10- 17.Ramos-Villagrasa,P.,Sánchez-Iglesias,I.,Grande-de-Prado,M.,Oliván-Blázquez,B.,&Martín-Peña, J.(2018).Spanishversionof“Self-efficacyforwritingscale”(SEWS).AnalesDePsicología, 34(1),86-91.Rogers,R.R.(2001).Reflectionsinhighereducation:aconceptofanalysis.InnovativeHigher Education,26(1),37-57.



Vilkas,B.&McCabe,C.(2014)Promotingstudents’self-efficacyintheonlineclassroom.Retrieved fromwww.Facultyfocus.com/articles/online-education/promoting-student-self-efficacy- online-classroom/Webb,A.F.,Vandiver,B.J.,Jeung,S.(2016).Doescompletinganenrichedwritingcourseimprove writingself-efficacyoftalentedsecondarystudents?GiftedChildQuarterly,60(1),47-62.

Journal of Teacher Action Research 1 JTAR · 2019-04-12 · Through this action research project, I...

Documents

Transcript of Journal of Teacher Action Research 1 JTAR · 2019-04-12 · Through this action research project, I...