Using Technology/WEB

2.0 Tools to Improve Writing

Yves AntenorCBSE 7202T.NET

Seminar in Applied Theory and Research IIProf. O'Connor-Petruso

2

TABLE OF CONTENTSResearch Design……………………………………………………3

Threats to Internal Validity……………………………………….4

Threats to External Validity………………………………………5

Bivariate Data #1…………………………………………………..6

Bivariate Data # 2…………………………………………………..7

Bivariate Data #3…………………………………………………...8

Reference……………………………………………………………9

3

RESEARCH DESIGN:This action research project will be conducted on a group of six

1st Graders at P.S. 282• Writing assignments by group, in a three-week period (Mondays & Wednesdays starting 11/4/13), will be examined as the class begins the new ELA (evidence-based) program called ReadyGen.• Written assignments will be done on wifi-enabled iPads. • On each iPad, students will be directed to a blank document page within the group’s Google Docs page: PS.282.db@gmail.com. Goal:To determine whether the quantity, quality, and enjoyment of writing improves with the inclusion of technology over time.

A Pre-test (O) and post-test (O) will consist pre- and post- surveys.

Treatment (X) will consist of ReadyGen writing assignments set by co-operating teacher. Design Representation: OXO

4

THREATS TO INTERNAL VALIDITY

Differential Selection of Subjects – A sampling of only high or low performing students can negatively impact the results.

Statistical Regression – A small number of participants may yield results, which are statistically insignificant.

5

THREATS TO EXTERNAL VALIDITY• Experimenter effect – Students may become too familiar with

me and may try harder than usual because of their exposure to the experimenter. As a result, the effect of the inclusion of technologies may be trumpeted by familiarity between the subject and the experimenter.

• Reactive arrangements – Some students may not be comfortable with typing on an iPad for an extended period.

• Specificity of Variables – Because research collects subjective/opinion data, differences between pre and post surveys may be hard to distinguish.

6

The finding from this data was most surprising from the pre-survey. I hypothesized that the more technology found in a household, the more usage students would get out of them. But based on the .298 rxy, there is no correlation between the two variables.

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.50

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Technology Usage vs. Technology Owned

Series1Linear (Series1)

Technology Usage (days in a week)

Com

pute

rs/T

able

ts in

the

hom

e x - Tech Usage y - Tech Owned2 23 14 31 02 23 34 24 54 22 12 34 54 12 33 84 2

7

2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.50

1

2

3

4

5

6

Enjoyment in Writing:Home vs. School

Series1Linear (Series1)

Enjoying writing at school

Enjo

ying

wri

tng

at h

ome

x - Enjoyment writing at school y - Enjoyment writing at home5 45 55 44 25 55 35 55 43 35 54 34 14 44 45 43 4

Fortunately, the attitudes of students towards writing in school had a positive correlation with their enjoyment to writing at home. With and rxy of .45, this a proof that a correlation exists between the two variables.

8

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.50

1

2

3

4

5

6

Attitudes to Writing at Schoolvs.

Writng at Home

Series1Linear (Series1)

Attitudes to Writng at School

Day

s D

edic

ated

to

Wri

ting

(pe

r w

eek)

x - Days spent writing at home y - Enjoyment writing at school4 53 53 51 43 52 54 54 53 34 52 42 42 44 44 44 52 3

With a .44 rxy, there is a true correlation between student attitudes about writing at school and taking time at home to write.

9

REFERENCE:O’Connor-Petruso, S. (2013). Descriptive Statistics Threats

to Validity. PowerPoint slides. Retrieved from

Blackboard Action Research site.