This study investigated interaction effects between the type and amount of teacher-written feedback, the sex of the subjects, and the degree of focus, organization, and development in two revised drafts of a 400-word description essay written by 43 college students in two sections of a freshman composition course taught by one instructor.Subjects in each section were randomly assigned to four different treatment groups to receive teacher-written comments or questions on their initial drafts and on their two revisions, each written in two 50-minute periods. Treatments were as follows: (1) Selective Comments were a terminal paragraph of specific suggestions for improving focus, organization, and development in the next draft. (2) Extensive Comments were a terminal paragraph of specific suggestions; specified errors in spelling, punctuation, agreement, and usage were noted in the margins. (3) Selective Questions about focus, organization, and development were written in the margins. (4) Extensive Questions about focus, organization, and development were written in the margins, and specified errors in spelling, punctuation, agreement, and usage were noted in the margins.Three dependent variables (focus, organization, and development) were measured on separate five-point scales by two raters. A 2 x 2 x 2 x 3 multivariate analysis of variance revealed two significant two-way interactions at the .05 level.The interaction between revision and sex showed that in response to teacher-written feedback on initial drafts, the males significantly improved their focus, organization, and development scores on the first revision, but the females improved only their focus and development scores. The interaction between revision and comment type showed that the Comment Groups improved their focus, organization, and development scores on the first revision, but the Question Groups improved only their focus and organization scores.A second revision (in response to teacher-written comments and questions and four 50-minute periods of practice in improving focus, organization, and development in sample student essays) showed no significant improvement over the first revision. There were also no significant differences between Selective Groups (no mechanical errors marked) and Extensive Groups (specified errors in spelling, punctuation, agreement, and usage noted).
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/180704 |
| Date | January 1985 |
| Creators | Shaw, Richard Murray |
| Contributors | Whitworth, Richard G. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | 140 leaves ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds